Comparative efficacy of pitavastatin and simvastatin in high-risk patients: a randomized controlled trial

A comprehensive review on the lipid and pleiotropic effects of pitavastatin

The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, or statins, are administered as first line therapy for hypercholesterolemia, both in primary and secondary prevention. There is a growing body of evidence showing that beyond their lipid-lowering effect, statins have a number of additional beneficial properties. Pitavastatin is a unique lipophilic statin with a strong effect on lowering plasma total cholesterol and triacylglycerol. It has been reported to have pleiotropic effects such as decreasing inflammation and oxidative stress, regulating angiogenesis and osteogenesis, improving endothelial function and arterial stiffness, and reducing tumor progression. Based on the available studies considering the risk of statin-associated muscle symptoms it seems to be also the safest statin. The unique lipid and non-lipid effects of pitavastatin make this molecule a particularly interesting option for the management of different human diseases. In this review, we first summarized the lipid effects of pitavastatin and then strive to unravel the diverse pleiotropic effects of this molecule.

Associations between statins and adverse events in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review with pairwise, network, and dose-response meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To assess the associations between statins and adverse events in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and to examine how the associations vary by type and dosage of statins.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Studies were identified from previous systematic reviews and searched in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, up to August 2020.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised controlled trials in adults without a history of cardiovascular disease that compared statins with non-statin controls or compared different types or dosages of statins were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were common adverse events: self-reported muscle symptoms, clinically confirmed muscle disorders, liver dysfunction, renal insufficiency, diabetes, and eye conditions. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, stroke, and death from cardiovascular disease as measures of efficacy.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A pairwise meta-analysis was conducted to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for each outcome between statins and non-statin controls, and the absolute risk difference in the number of events per 10 000 patients treated for a year was estimated. A network meta-analysis was performed to compare the adverse effects of different types of statins. An E_max model based meta-analysis was used to examine the dose-response relationships of the adverse effects of each statin.

RESULTS

62 trials were included, with 120 456 participants followed up for an average of 3.9 years. Statins were associated with an increased risk of self-reported muscle symptoms (21 trials, odds ratio 1.06 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.13); absolute risk difference 15 (95% confidence interval 1 to 29)), liver dysfunction (21 trials, odds ratio 1.33 (1.12 to 1.58); absolute risk difference 8 (3 to 14)), renal insufficiency (eight trials, odds ratio 1.14 (1.01 to 1.28); absolute risk difference 12 (1 to 24)), and eye conditions (six trials, odds ratio 1.23 (1.04 to 1.47); absolute risk difference 14 (2 to 29)) but were not associated with clinically confirmed muscle disorders or diabetes. The increased risks did not outweigh the reduction in the risk of major cardiovascular events. Atorvastatin, lovastatin, and rosuvastatin were individually associated with some adverse events, but few significant differences were found between types of statins. An E_max dose-response relationship was identified for the effect of atorvastatin on liver dysfunction, but the dose-response relationships for the other statins and adverse effects were inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

For primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, the risk of adverse events attributable to statins was low and did not outweigh their efficacy in preventing cardiovascular disease, suggesting that the benefit-to-harm balance of statins is generally favourable. Evidence to support tailoring the type or dosage of statins to account for safety concerns before starting treatment was limited.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020169955.

Pitavastatin for lowering lipids

BACKGROUND

Pitavastatin is the newest statin on the market, and the dose-related magnitude of effect of pitavastatin on blood lipids is not known.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of pitavastatin on the surrogate markers: LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides in participants with and without cardiovascular disease. To compare the effect of pitavastatin on surrogate markers with other statins.  Secondary objectives To quantify the effect of various doses of pitavastatin on withdrawals due to adverse effects.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for trials up to March 2019: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 2, 2019), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCT and controlled before-and-after studies evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of pitavastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks in participants of any age with and without cardiovascular disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included, and extracted data. We entered data from RCT and controlled before-and-after studies into Review Manager 5 as continuous and generic inverse variance data, respectively. Withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAE) information was collected from the RCTs. We assessed all included trials using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool under the categories of allocation (selection bias), blinding (performance bias and detection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), selective reporting (reporting bias), and other potential sources of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven studies (five RCTs and 42 before-and-after studies) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of pitavastatin in 5436 participants. The participants were of any age with and without cardiovascular disease, and pitavastatin effects were studied within a treatment period of three to 12 weeks. Log dose-response data over doses of 1 mg to 16 mg revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol and triglycerides. There was no dose-related effect of pitavastatin on blood HDL cholesterol, which was increased by 4% on average by pitavastatin. Pitavastatin 1 mg/day to 16 mg/day reduced LDL cholesterol by 33.3% to 54.7%, total cholesterol by 23.3% to 39.0% and triglycerides by 13.0% to 28.1%. For every two-fold dose increase, there was a 5.35% (95% CI 3.32 to 7.38) decrease in blood LDL cholesterol, a 3.93% (95% CI 2.35 to 5.50) decrease in blood total cholesterol and a 3.76% (95% CI 1.03 to 6.48) decrease in blood triglycerides. The certainty of evidence for these effects was judged to be high. When compared to other statins for its effect to reduce LDL cholesterol, pitavastatin is about 6-fold more potent than atorvastatin, 1.7-fold more potent than rosuvastatin, 77-fold more potent than fluvastatin and 3.3-fold less potent than cerivastatin. For the placebo group, there were no participants who withdrew due to an adverse effect per 109 subjects and for all doses of pitavastatin, there were three participants who withdrew due to an adverse effect per 262 subjects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pitavastatin lowers blood total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglyceride in a dose-dependent linear fashion. Based on the effect on LDL cholesterol, pitavastatin is about 6-fold more potent than atorvastatin, 1.7-fold more potent than rosuvastatin, 77-fold more potent than fluvastatin and 3.3-fold less potent than cerivastatin. There were not enough data to determine risk of withdrawal due to adverse effects due to pitavastatin.

Current perspectives on the use of statins in the treatment of dyslipidaemic patients: focus on pitavastatin

A meeting entitled 'Current Perspective on the Use of Statins in the Treatment of Dyslipidemic Patients' was held in Stresa, Italy, on 27-28th June 2019. The presentations covered the 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines on dyslipidaemia, with discussion about the importance of controlling low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and the pharmacological opportunities to reach the novel lipid goals. The roles of statins to manage dyslipidaemia in patients with different cardiovascular risks were also discussed. In particular, the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin for the treatment of dyslipidaemia were reviewed, highlighting its further advantages beyond LDL-C reduction. Therefore, the impact of statins on the glycaemic profile was discussed in view of the null/lower effect of pitavastatin as compared with other statins, as well as the interaction profile with other drugs commonly used. This meeting report summarizes the main messages of the discussion with a special focus on pitavastatin, whose main features in different settings are described.

Mechanisms of statin-associated skeletal muscle-associated symptoms

Statins lower the serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and prevent cardiovascular events by inhibiting 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA reductase. Although the safety of statins is documented, many patients ingesting statins may suffer from skeletal muscle-associated symptoms (SAMS). Importantly, SAMS are a common reason for stopping the treatment with statins. Statin-associated muscular symptoms include fatigue, weakness and pain, possibly accompanied by elevated serum creatine kinase activity. The most severe muscular adverse reaction is the potentially fatal rhabdomyolysis. The frequency of SAMS is variable but in up to 30% of the patients ingesting statins, depending on the population treated and the statin used. The mechanisms leading to SAMS are currently not completely clarified. Over the last 15 years, several research articles focused on statin-induced mitochondrial dysfunction as a reason for SAMS. Statins can impair the function of the mitochondrial respiratory chain, thereby reducing ATP and increasing ROS production. This can induce mitochondrial membrane permeability transition, release of cytochrome c into the cytosol and induce apoptosis. In parallel, statins inhibit activation of Akt, mainly due to reduced function of mTORC2, which may be related to mitochondrial dysfunction. Mitochondrial dysfunction by statins is also responsible for activation of AMPK, which is associated with impaired activation of mTORC1. Reduced activation of mTORC1 leads to increased skeletal muscle protein degradation, impaired protein synthesis and stimulation of apoptosis. In this paper, we discuss some of the different hypotheses how statins affect skeletal muscle in more detail, focusing particularly on those related to mitochondrial dysfunction and the impairment of the Akt/mTOR pathway.

Using a single noninferiority margin or preserved fraction for an entire pharmacological class was found to be inappropriate

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact on noninferiority decisions when using a single margin or single preserved fraction (PF) for all noninferiority trials within a pharmacological class.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A search in PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL resulted in seven active-controlled statin trials (nine noninferiority comparisons) for treating hyperlipidemia. The impact of using a single margin was assessed by calculating whether this margin corresponds to different PFs among comparator statins which will demonstrate that the threshold of demonstrating noninferiority (in terms of the PF) varies among comparator statins. The use of a single PF was assessed by reanalyzing noninferiority in the included trials with new margins (based on the single PF) for each comparator statin.

RESULTS

The use of a single margin resulted in PFs that range between 81% and 89% for the different comparators (i.e., different thresholds). The use of a single PF resulted in four of nine (44%) different noninferiority conclusions compared with the original analyses.

CONCLUSION

The threshold of demonstrating noninferiority with a single margin or single PF of the effect per pharmacological class may not be consistent with using a margin/PF for each comparator separately and may impact the conclusions of noninferiority.

Pitavastatin: A Review in Hypercholesterolemia

Oral pitavastatin (Livalo^®; Livazo^®) is a competitive HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor that is available in the EU for the reduction of elevated total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in adults with primary hypercholesterolemia and combined (mixed) dyslipidemia. In short-term, phase III or IV studies in this patient population, pitavastatin 1-4 mg once daily was generally no less effective than presumed equipotent dosages of atorvastatin and simvastatin (including in patients with type 2 diabetes or ≥2 cardiovascular risk factors) and was superior to pravastatin (including in patients aged ≥65 years) in lowering LDL-C levels. Pitavastatin provided sustained LDL-C-lowering efficacy over up to 60 weeks' therapy in extension studies, and was associated with short- and longer-term improvements in several other lipid parameters. Short- and longer-term outcomes in studies in Asian patients were consistent with these findings. Pitavastatin was generally well tolerated and did not appear to adversely affect glucose metabolism parameters (e.g. fasting blood glucose, fasting plasma glucose, fasting plasma insulin, glycated hemoglobin) in short- and longer-term prospective and post-marketing surveillance studies in adults. Moreover, in combination with lifestyle modification advice, it was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of progression from impaired glucose tolerance to diabetes relative to lifestyle modification advice alone in a longer-term study in Japanese subjects. Thus, pitavastatin is an effective treatment option in adults with primary hypercholesterolemia and combined (mixed) dyslipidemia, including those at risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

Clinical benefits of pitavastatin: focus on patients with diabetes or at risk of developing diabetes

Despite attaining LDL-cholesterol targets, many patients with diabetes remain at risk of developing cardiovascular events. In addition, treatment with statins has been associated with a slight but significant increased risk of development of diabetes, particularly with high-intensity statins. Pitavastatin is a moderate- to high-intensity statin that effectively reduces LDL-cholesterol levels. Pitavastatin provides a sustained increase of HDL-cholesterol levels that may exhibit a neutral or positive effect on glucose metabolism, may not increase the risk of new-onset diabetes, may exhibit positive effects on renal function and urinary albumin excretion and the risk of drug–drug interactions is low. Therefore, it seems that pitavastatin should preferentially be considered in the treatment of dyslipidemia in diabetic patients or at risk of developing diabetes.

Efficacy and Safety of Pitavastatin in Children and Adolescents at High Future Cardiovascular Risk

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of pitavastatin in children and adolescents with hyperlipidemia.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 106 children and adolescents with hyperlipidemia, ages 6 to 17 years, were enrolled in a 12-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study and randomly assigned to pitavastatin 1 mg, 2 mg, 4 mg, or placebo. During a 52-week extension period, subjects were up-titrated from 1 mg pitavastatin to a maximum dose of 4 mg in an effort to achieve an optimum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) treatment target of <110 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L). Adverse events rates, including abnormal clinical laboratory variables, vital signs, and physical examination were assessed.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, pitavastatin 1, 2, and 4 mg significantly reduced LDL-C from baseline by 23.5%, 30.1%, and 39.3%, respectively, and in the open-label study 20.5% of the subjects reached the LDL-C goal <110 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L). No safety issues were evident.

CONCLUSIONS

Pitavastatin at doses up to 4 mg is well tolerated and efficacious in children and adolescents aged 6-17 years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered with EudraCT 2011-004964-32 and EudraCT 2011-004983-32.

Benefit-risk assessment of pitavastatin for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia in older patients

With the practice-shifting changes made with the most recent guidelines for treating blood cholesterol, more older patients may be prescribed statin therapy. Therefore, it is imperative that practitioners have not only a working knowledge of information related to statins, but more specifically to their efficacy and safety in elderly populations. Pitavastatin is the most recent statin to receive regulatory approval. It is indicated for the treatment of primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia as an adjunctive therapy to diet. The overall body of evidence for the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin in elderly patients is small. The available data suggest that the ability of pitavastatin to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in elderly patients is at least similar, and may be greater than that seen in comparatively younger cohorts. Taken together, the limited available data suggest that pitavastatin is effective at improving lipid parameters in elderly patients with a similar safety profile to other agents in the class. Until data become available distinguishing pitavastatin from the other available options, its ultimate role in the hyperlipidemia treatment armamentarium remains unclear.

Comparative efficacy of pitavastatin and simvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Simvastatin is a statin used to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, but has limitations in patients on complicated regimens due to concerns about drug-drug interactions. Pitavastatin is a newly developed statin with limited drug-drug interactions. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy of simvastatin and pitavastatin in the control of hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

Randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy of pitavastatin and simvastatin were identified by searching PubMed (2000-2014) and EMBASE (2000-2014). The primary outcome subjected to meta-analysis was percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol compared with baseline.

RESULTS

Four clinical trials were selected for meta-analysis. A total of 908 patients treated with pitavastatin (2 or 4 mg/day) and 381 patients treated with simvastatin (20 or 40 mg/day) were included in the final statistical analysis. No statistically significant difference was identified between treatment with pitavastatin 4 mg/day and treatment with simvastatin 40 mg/day for 12 weeks (mean difference -0.66; 95% confidence interval -2.92, 1.61; P=0.57). Similarly, no statistically significant difference was observed between pitavastatin 2 mg/day and simvastatin 20 mg/day for 4 weeks (mean difference -2.19; 95% confidence interval -0.11, 4.49; P=0.06). Treatment with pitavastatin was noninferior to simvastatin in all of the secondary outcomes and the safety profile was similar between the two statins.

CONCLUSION

Pitavastatin is noninferior to simvastatin in lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

Effect of high-dose pitavastatin on glucose homeostasis in patients at elevated risk of new-onset diabetes: insights from the CAPITAIN and PREVAIL-US studies

AIMS

Statin treatment may impair glucose homeostasis and increase the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus, although this may depend on the statin, dose and patient population. We evaluated the effects of pitavastatin 4 mg/day on glucose homeostasis in patients with metabolic syndrome in the CAPITAIN trial. Findings were validated in a subset of patients enrolled in PREVAIL-US.

METHODS

Participants with a well defined metabolic syndrome phenotype were recruited to CAPITAIN to reduce the influence of confounding factors. Validation and comparison datasets were selected comprising phenotypically similar subsets of individuals enrolled in PREVAIL-US and treated with pitavastatin or pravastatin, respectively. Mean change from baseline in parameters of glucose homeostasis (fasting plasma glucose [FPG], glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], insulin, quantitative insulin-sensitivity check index [QUICKI] and homeostasis model of assessment-insulin resistance [HOMA-IR]) and plasma lipid profile were assessed at 6 months (CAPITAIN) and 3 months (PREVAIL-US) after initiating treatment.

RESULTS

In CAPITAIN (n = 12), no significant differences from baseline in HbA1c, insulin, HOMA-IR and QUICKI were observed at day 180 in patients treated with pitavastatin. A small (4%) increase in FPG from baseline to day 180 (P < 0.05), was observed. In the validation dataset (n = 9), no significant differences from baseline in glycemic parameters were observed at day 84 (all comparisons P > 0.05). Similar results were observed for pravastatin in the comparison dataset (n = 14).

CONCLUSIONS

Other than a small change in FPG in the CAPITAIN study, neutral effects of pitavastatin on glucose homeostasis were observed in two cohorts of patients with metabolic syndrome, independent of its efficacy in reducing levels of atherogenic lipoproteins. The small number of patients and relatively short follow-up period represent limitations of the study. Nevertheless, these data suggest that statin-induced diabetogenesis may not represent a class effect.

Statins in cardiometabolic disease: what makes pitavastatin different?

The term cardiometabolic disease encompasses a range of lifestyle-related conditions, including Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and type 2 diabetes (T2D), that are characterized by different combinations of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, including dyslipidemia, abdominal obesity, hypertension, hyperglycemia/insulin resistance, and vascular inflammation. These risk factors individually and interdependently increase the risk of CV and cerebrovascular events, and represent one of the biggest health challenges worldwide today. CV diseases account for almost 50% of all deaths in Europe and around 30% of all deaths worldwide. Furthermore, the risk of CV death is increased twofold to fourfold in people with T2D. Whilst the clinical management of CV disease has improved in Western Europe, the pandemic of obesity and T2D reduces the impact of these gains. This, together with the growing, aging population, means the number of CV deaths is predicted to increase from 17.1 million worldwide in 2004 to 23.6 million in 2030. The recommended treatment for MetS is lifestyle change followed by treatment for the individual risk factors. Numerous studies have shown that lowering low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels using statins can significantly reduce CV risk in people with and without T2D or MetS. However, the risk of major vascular events in those attaining the maximum levels of LDL-C-reduction is only reduced by around one-third, which leaves substantial residual risk. Recent studies suggest that low high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) (<1 .0 mmol/l; 40 mg/dl) and high triglyceride levels (≥1.7 mmol/l; 150 mg/dl) are independent risk factors for CV disease and that the relationship between HDL-C and CV risk persists even when on-treatment LDL-C levels are low (<1.7 mmol/l; 70 mg/dl). European guidelines highlight the importance of reducing residual risk by targeting these risk factors in addition to LDL-C. This is particularly important in patients with T2D and MetS because obesity and high levels of glycated hemoglobin are directly related to low levels of HDL-C and high triglyceride. Although most statins have a similar low-density lipoprotein-lowering efficacy, differences in chemical structure and pharmacokinetic profile can lead to variations in pleiotropic effects (for example, high-density lipoprotein-elevating efficacy), adverse event profiles, and drug-drug interactions. The choice of statin should therefore depend on the needs of the individual patient. The following reviews will discuss the potential benefits of pitavastatin versus other statins in the treatment of patients with dyslipidemia and MetS or T2D, focusing on its effects on HDL-C quantity and quality, its potential impact on atherosclerosis and CV risk, and its metabolic characteristics that reduce the risk of drug interactions. Recent controversies surrounding the potentially diabetogenic effects of statins will also be discussed.

Pitavastatin in cardiometabolic disease: therapeutic profile

Statins effectively lower low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) and reduce cardiovascular risk in people with dyslipidemia and cardiometabolic diseases such as Metabolic syndrome (MetS) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). In addition to elevated levels of LDL-C, people with these conditions often have other lipid-related risk factors, such as high levels of triglycerides, low levels of high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), and a preponderance of highly atherogenic, small, dense low-density lipoprotein particles. The optimal management of dyslipidemia in people with MetS or T2D should therefore address each of these risk factors in addition to LDL-C. Although statins typically have similar effects on LDL-C levels, differences in chemical structure and pharmacokinetic profile can lead to variations in pleiotropic effects, adverse event profiles and drug-drug interactions. The choice of statin should therefore depend on the characteristics and needs of the individual patient. Compared with other statins, pitavastatin has distinct pharmacological features that translate into a broad range of actions on both apolipoprotein-B-containing and apolipoprotein-A-containing lipoproteins. Studies show that pitavastatin 1 to 4 mg is well tolerated and significantly improves LDL-C and triglyceride levels to a similar or greater degree than comparable doses of atorvastatin, simvastatin or pravastatin, irrespective of diabetic status. Moreover, whereas most statins show inconsistent effects on HDL-C levels, pitavastatin-treated patients routinely experience clinically significant elevations in HDL-C that are maintained and even increased over the long term. In addition to increasing high-density lipoprotein quantity, pitavastatin appears to improve high-density lipoprotein function and to slow the progression of atherosclerotic plaques by modifying high-density lipoprotein-related inflammation and oxidation, both of which are common in patients with MetS and T2D. When choosing a statin, it is important to note that patients with MetS have an increased risk of developing T2D and that some statins can exacerbate this risk via adverse effects on glucose regulation. Unlike many statins, pitavastatin appears to have a neutral and even beneficial effect on glucose regulation, making it a useful treatment option in this high-risk group of patients. Together with pitavastatin’s beneficial effects on the cardiometabolic lipid profile and its low potential for drug-drug interactions, this suggests that pitavastatin might be a useful lipid-lowering option for people with cardiometabolic disease.

The clinical impact of pitavastatin: comparative studies with other statins on LDL-C and HDL-C

INTRODUCTION

Statins are currently the most effective drugs for lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and represent the first choice for treating hypercholesterolemia. Pitavastatin was launched as a new statin on the Japanese market in 2003, followed by Korea, Thailand, China, the United States and Europe. This review summarizes and evaluates new insights into pitavastatin, from clinical trials since 2010.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews studies that compare pitavastatin with various other statins: i) Randomized Head-to-Head Comparison of Pitavastatin, Atorvastatin, and Rosuvastatin for Safety and Efficacy (Quantity and Quality of LDL): the PATROL Trial; ii) various Phase III clinical trials in Western countries; iii) The Comparison of Preventive Effect on Cardiovascular Events With Different Statins (CIRCLE) study; and iv) The Livalo Effectiveness and Safety (LIVES) Study Extension. Pitavastatin was found to have a similar LDL-C-lowering effect to other strong statins but also had a strong HDL-C-elevating effect and did not worsen glucose metabolism.

EXPERT OPINION

Pitavastatin has been launched in various countries around the world as a statin with potent LDL-C-lowering activity that is virtually unmetabolized by the cytochrome P450 family, with relatively few drug-drug interactions and no adverse effects on blood glucose. Pitavastatin thus appears well suited to long-term use.

Long-term efficacy of pitavastatin versus simvastatin

INTRODUCTION

Pitavastatin is a novel, potent, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor. This study compared the long-term efficacy of pitavastatin and simvastatin in dyslipidemic patients at high risk of coronary heart disease.

METHODS

A 44-week blinded extension study was conducted at 24 centers in five European countries for patients who had previously completed a 12-week randomized, double-blind core study in which they received pitavastatin 4 mg or simvastatin 40 mg once daily. Patients originally randomized to pitavastatin 4 mg continued at the same dose throughout the extension study (n = 121). In simvastatin-treated patients (n = 57), the dose was increased to 80 mg in five patients who had not attained the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) target for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) during the core study. Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients attaining the NCEP and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) LDL-C targets, and the NCEP target for non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) at weeks 16 and 44.

RESULTS

Of the 178 patients who entered the extension study, 156 patients (109 in the pitavastatin group, 47 in the simvastatin groups) completed the 44-week treatment period. At week 44, NCEP and EAS targets were attained by 81.7% and 84.2%, respectively, of pitavastatin-treated patients, and 75.4% and 73.7%, respectively, of simvastatin-treated patients. NCEP targets for non-HDL-C were achieved by 79.2% of pitavastatin-treated patients and 70.2% of simvastatin-treated patients. Both treatments were generally well tolerated, but pitavastatin 4 mg was associated with a numerically lower incidence of discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events (5.8% vs. 10.5% of patients) and a lower rate of myalgia (4.1% vs. 12.3%) compared with simvastatin 40-80 mg.

CONCLUSION

Pitavastatin 4 mg provides long-term efficacy similar to that of simvastatin 40-80 mg. Further studies should ascertain whether trends suggesting that pitavastatin may exhibit a more favorable long-term tolerability profile are statistically significant.