Efficacy and tolerability of atorvastatin/fenofibrate fixed-dose combination tablet compared with atorvastatin and fenofibrate monotherapies in patients with dyslipidemia: A 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study

Impact of Statin or Fibrate Therapy on Homocysteine Concentrations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Statins and fibrates are two lipid-lowering drugs used in patients with dyslipidemia. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to determine the magnitude of the effect of statin and fibrate therapy on serum homocysteine levels.

METHODS

A search was undertaken of the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar electronic databases up to 15 July 2022. Primary endpoints focused on plasma homocysteine levels. Data were quantitatively analyzed using fixed or random- effect models, as appropriate. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on the drugs and hydrophilic-lipophilic balance of statins.

RESULTS

After screening 1134 papers, 52 studies with a total of 20651 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The analysis showed a significant decrease in plasma homocysteine levels after statin therapy (WMD: -1.388 μmol/L, 95% CI: [-2.184, -0.592], p = 0.001; I2 = 95%). However, fibrate therapy significantly increased plasma homocysteine levels (WMD: 3.459 μmol/L, 95% CI: [2.849, 4.069], p < 0.001; I2 = 98%). The effect of atorvastatin and simvastatin depended on the dose and duration of treatment (atorvastatin [coefficient: 0.075 [0.0132, 0.137]; p = 0.017, coefficient: 0.103 [0.004, 0.202]; p = 0.040, respectively] and simvastatin [coefficient: -0.047 [-0.063, -0.031]; p < 0.001, coefficient: 0.046 [0.016, 0.078]; p = 0.004]), whereas the effect of fenofibrate persisted over time (coefficient: 0.007 [-0.011, 0.026]; p = 0.442) and was not altered by a change in dosage (coefficient: -0.004 [-0.031, 0.024]; p = 0.798). In addition, the greater homocysteine- lowering effect of statins was associated with higher baseline plasma homocysteine concentrations (coefficient: -0.224 [-0.340, -0.109]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Fibrates significantly increased homocysteine levels, whereas statins significantly decreased them.

Role of lipoprotein(a) in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A review of current and emerging therapies

Lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), is structurally like low-density lipoprotein (LDL) but differs in that it contains glycoprotein apolipoprotein(a) [apo(a)]. Due to its prothrombotic and proinflammatory properties, Lp(a) is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis. Lp(a) levels are genetically determined, and it is estimated that 20%-25% of the global population has an Lp(a) level ≥50 mg/dL (or ≥125 nmol/L). Diet and lifestyle interventions have little to no effect on Lp(a) levels. Lipoprotein apheresis is the only approved treatment for elevated Lp(a) but is time-intensive for the patient and only modestly effective. Pharmacological approaches to reduce Lp(a) levels and its associated risks are of significant interest; however, currently available lipid-lowering therapies have limited effectiveness in reducing Lp(a) levels. Although statins are first-line agents to reduce LDL cholesterol levels, they modestly increase Lp(a) levels and have not been shown to change Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk. Alirocumab, evolocumab, and inclisiran reduce Lp(a) levels by 20-25%, yet the clinical implications of this reduction for Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk are uncertain. Niacin also lowers Lp(a) levels; however, its effectiveness in mitigating Lp(a)-mediated ASCVD risk remains unclear, and its side effects have limited its utilization. Recommendations for when to screen and how to manage individuals with elevated Lp(a) vary widely between national and international guidelines and scientific statements. Three investigational compounds targeting Lp(a), including small interfering RNA (siRNA) agents (olpasiran, SLN360) and an antisense oligonucleotide (pelacarsen), are in various stages of development. These compounds block the translation of messenger RNA (mRNA) into apo(a), a key structural component of Lp(a), thereby substantially reducing Lp(a) synthesis in the liver. The purpose of this review is to describe current recommendations for screening and managing elevated Lp(a), describe the effects of currently available lipid-lowering therapies on Lp(a) levels, and provide insight into emerging therapies targeting Lp(a).

Fixed Combination for the Treatment of Dyslipidaemia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

It is clear from epidemiological studies that patients at high and very-high risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) risk do not reach lipid guideline-recommended targets. Thus, fixed-dose combinations of statins/ezetimibe, bempedoic acid/ezetimibe and statins/fibrates may represent a further armamentarium in the field of lipid-lowering approaches in these individuals.

RECENT FINDINGS

The combination therapy of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe is not inferior to high-intensity statin monotherapy in reducing cardiovascular outcomes. Drug discontinuation or dose reduction is inferior with fixed-dose combination. The fixed-dose combination of bempedoic acid with ezetimibe is superior to bempedoic acid in monotherapy in lowering LDL-C and in reducing high-sensitivity C-reactive protein concentrations. The combination fenofibrate with atorvastatin is superior to monotherapies in lowering triglycerides. Lipid-lowering fixed-dose combinations may guarantee a higher therapy adherence, representing a better approach to control plasma lipids and thus ameliorate ASCVD burden. Additional studies will define the advantages on cardiovascular outcomes in high and very high-risk patients.

A model-agnostic framework to enhance knowledge graph-based drug combination prediction with drug-drug interaction data and supervised contrastive learning

Combination therapies have brought significant advancements to the treatment of various diseases in the medical field. However, searching for effective drug combinations remains a major challenge due to the vast number of possible combinations. Biomedical knowledge graph (KG)-based methods have shown potential in predicting effective combinations for wide spectrum of diseases, but the lack of credible negative samples has limited the prediction performance of machine learning models. To address this issue, we propose a novel model-agnostic framework that leverages existing drug-drug interaction (DDI) data as a reliable negative dataset and employs supervised contrastive learning (SCL) to transform drug embedding vectors to be more suitable for drug combination prediction. We conducted extensive experiments using various network embedding algorithms, including random walk and graph neural networks, on a biomedical KG. Our framework significantly improved performance metrics compared to the baseline framework. We also provide embedding space visualizations and case studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. This work highlights the potential of using DDI data and SCL in finding tighter decision boundaries for predicting effective drug combinations.

Prevalence of statin intolerance: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Statin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes mellitus (OR 1.26, P = 0.02), hypothyroidism (OR 1.37, P = 0.01), chronic liver, and renal failure (P < 0.05 for both) were significantly associated with SI in the meta-regression model. Antiarrhythmic agents, calcium channel blockers, alcohol use, and increased statin dose were also associated with a higher risk of SI.

CONCLUSION

Based on the present analysis of >4 million patients, the prevalence of SI is low when diagnosed according to international definitions. These results support the concept that the prevalence of complete SI might often be overestimated and highlight the need for the careful assessment of patients with potential symptoms related to SI.

Effect of statin treatment on homocysteine concentrations: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis with meta-regression

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Statins might exert atheroprotective effects through lowering the pro-atherogenic amino acid homocysteine. We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of statins on circulating homocysteine.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, from inception to July 2021. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for analytical studies. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

In 61 treatment arms in 2,218 patients (mean age 55 years, 52% males), statins significantly reduced homocysteine concentrations (weighted mean difference, WMD = -2.46 µmol/L, 95% CI -3.17 to -1.75 µmol/L, p < 0.001; high certainty of evidence). Similar results were observed in a subgroup of 10 randomized placebo-controlled studies (WMD = -2.45 µmol/L, 95% CI -4.43 to -0.47 µmol/L, p = 0.015). The extreme heterogeneity observed was virtually removed in a subgroup of 10 studies using fluorescence polarization immunoassay for homocysteine measurement. There was no publication bias. In sensitivity analysis, the pooled WMD values were not modified when individual studies were sequentially removed. In meta-regression, the WMD was significantly associated with proportion of males and publication year.

CONCLUSIONS

Statins significantly lower homocysteine concentrations.

The Effect of Fibrates on Kidney Function and Chronic Kidney Disease Progression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Studies

Aim: Fibrates have proven efficacy in cardiovascular risk reduction and are commonly used, in addition to statins, to control hypertriglyceridaemia. Their use is often limited due to reduction in glomerular filtration rate at treatment initiation. However, recent studies suggest benign changes in kidney function and improvement of proteinuria, an established early marker of microvascular disease and kidney disease progression. We summarize the evidence from existing trials and provide a summary of effects of fibrates, alone or in combination, on kidney disease progression and proteinuria. Methods and Results: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (PROSPERO CRD42020187764). Out of 12,243 potentially eligible studies, 29 were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis, with a total of 20,176 patients. Mean creatinine increased by 1.05 (95% CI (0.63 to 1.46)) units in patients receiving fibrates vs. comparator, and this was similar in all other subgroups. eGFR showed a bigger decrease in the fibrates arm (SMD −1.99; 95% CI (−3.49 to −0.48)) when all studies were pooled together. Notably, short-term serum creatinine and eGFR changes remained constant in the long-term. Pooled estimates show that fibrates improve albuminuria progression, RR 0.86; 95% CI (0.76 to 0.98); albuminuria regression, RR 1.19; 95% CI (1.08 to 1.310). Conclusions: Fibrates improve albuminuria in patients with and without diabetes when used to treat hyperlipidaemia. The modest creatinine increase should not be a limiting factor for fibrate initiation in people with preserved renal function or mild CKD. The long-term effects on kidney disease progression warrant further study.

Fenofibrate impairs liver function and structure more pronounced in old than young rats

INTRODUCTION

Since old animals are known to accumulate lipids in some organs, we compared effects of fenofibrate (FN) on systemic lipid metabolism, activity of liver marker enzymes and structure in young and old rats.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Young and old rats were fed chow supplemented with 0.1 % or 0.5 % FN. After 30 days, intraperitoneal glucose tolerance test (IPGTT) was performed, and blood and liver samples were collected.

RESULTS

In young rats, 0.1 % FN, but not 0.5 % FN, decreased serum Chol by 74 %, and did not affect TG levels at either doses. In old rats, 0.5 % FN, but not 0.1 % FN, decreased Chol and TG level by 56 % and 49 %, respectively. In young rats, 0.1 % and 0.5 % FN increased serum activity of ALP by 227 % and 260 %, respectively, and did not affect AST and ALT activities. In old rats, only 0.5 % FN increased serum ALP activity by 150 %, respectively. In old rats, neither dose of FN affected serum AST activity, and only 0.5 % FN increased serum ALT activity by 200 %. The histological examination of liver structure revealed that both doses of FN impaired lobular architecture, expansion of bile canaliculi, and degeneration of parenchymal cells with the presence of cells containing fat droplets; administration of FN increased area occupied by collagen fibers.

CONCLUSIONS

Although 0.5 % FN decreased serum Chol concentration, it increased serum ALP activity and impaired liver structure in both in both age groups of rats. Thus, FN treatment should be under the control of liver function, especially in older patients.

Targeting metabolic dysregulation for fibrosis therapy

Fibrosis is the abnormal deposition of extracellular matrix, which can lead to organ dysfunction, morbidity, and death. The disease burden caused by fibrosis is substantial, and there are currently no therapies that can prevent or reverse fibrosis. Metabolic alterations are increasingly recognized as an important pathogenic process that underlies fibrosis across many organ types. As a result, metabolically targeted therapies could become important strategies for fibrosis reduction. Indeed, some of the pathways targeted by antifibrotic drugs in development - such as the activation of transforming growth factor-β and the deposition of extracellular matrix - have metabolic implications. This Review summarizes the evidence to date and describes novel opportunities for the discovery and development of drugs for metabolic reprogramming, their associated challenges, and their utility in reducing fibrosis. Fibrotic therapies are potentially relevant to numerous common diseases such as cirrhosis, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, chronic renal disease, heart failure, diabetes, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and scleroderma.

Comparative study of the effect of atorvastatin and fenofibrate on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in patients with type 2 diabetes

Diabetes is the most common metabolic disease. Type 2 diabetes is a variable combination of insulin resistance and disorder in insulin secretion, leading to disorder of lipids and plasma lipoproteins. The most common pattern of dyslipidemia in diabetic is high triglyceride (TG) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). This study was conducted to find a more effective drug to increase HDL-C. In this study, 80 patients (26 males and 54 females) with type 2 diabetes received fenofibrate in cross-sectional way for 2 months, and they did not take antilipid drugs for 2 month. Then, they underwent atorvastatin for 2 months and HDL-C was measured before and after taking drugs. Patients did not change their diet during this study. Effect of atorvastatin and fenofibrate on HDL-C levels in patients with type 2 diabetes was evaluated. The mean HDL-C and total cholesterol (TC) before and after taking drugs were 36.5 mg/dL and 174.56 mg/dL, respectively. After atorvastatin, the mean HDL-C and TC were 43.30 and 150.144 mg/dL, respectively, and after fenofibrate, 43.40 were mg/dL and 146.36 mg/dL, respectively. Atorvastatin caused increase in HDL-C by 18.44% and reduction in TC by 13.82% and fenofibrate increase in HDL-C by18.62% and reduction in TC by 16.05%. No difference was seen between atorvastatin and fenofibrate in terms of effect on the HDL-C excess (P = 0.449). In addition, no difference was seen between atorvastatin and fenofibrate in terms of effect on TC reduction (P = 0.992). In conclusion various factors are involved in increasing the HDL, such as race, sex, nutrition, physical activity and, of course, medications. The effect of medications is also different on races and genetics. The value of increase in HDL-C after Fenofibrate and Atorvastatin was associated with gender so that it caused more increase of HDL-C in females.

Effect and safety of combination lipid-lowering therapies based on statin treatment versus statin monotherapies on patients with high risk of cardiovascular events

This study aimed to compare the effect and safety of statin monotherapies and combination therapies on lipid-lowing therapies. We searched for published randomized controlled trial (RCT) reports of statin monotherapies and combination therapies in patients with high risk of cardiovascular events, and extracted lipid levels to perform meta-analysis. A total of 12 RCT reports were included in this study. According to the new guidelines (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] < 100 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C] > 130 mg/dL), the percent of LDL-C attaining goals in combination therapy is more than that of monotherapy (risk ratio [RR] = 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13 to 1.82, P = 0.003), and the percent of LDL-C and HDL-C attaining goals in combination therapy is greater than that of monotherapy (RR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.24 to 1.65, P = 0.000). The changing level of blood lipid had significant statistical difference between the two groups. The degree of blood lipid lowered by combination therapy was larger than in monotherapy (standard mean difference [SMD] = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.75 to -0.14, P = 0.004; SMD = -0.72, 95% CI: 0.04 to 1.39, P = 0.039; and SMD = -0.71, 95% CI: -1.12 to -0.3, P = 0.001 in LDL-C, HDL-C, and triglyceride, respectively). The incidence of adverse events was not significantly different between the two groups (RR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.37, P = 0.096; RR = 1.5, 95% CI: 0.55 to 4.1, P = 0.427; RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.24, P = 0.181 in incidence of total adverse events, drug-related treatment, and myalgia, respectively). Combination therapy can bring better effect in reducing lipid. It does not increase the incidence of adverse events, so it can be used widely and safely.

Therapeutic plasmapheresis for hypertriglyceridemia-associated acute pancreatitis: case series and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Severe hypertriglyceridemia (HTG) is the third leading cause of acute pancreatitis (AP) in the United States. The current standard of care includes management of HTG using pharmacological therapy. More recently, plasmapheresis has been proposed as a therapeutic tool for decreasing triglyceride (TG) levels, especially in critically ill patients. Few studies are available to ascertain overall benefits of plasmapheresis over traditional management.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the outcomes of patients treated with plasmapheresis for severe HTG-associated pancreatitis.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of three patients with severe HTG- associated (TGs greater than 1000 mg/dl; 11.29 mmol/l) AP at the Methodist University Hospital. All the patients underwent plasmapheresis as part of their treatment.

RESULTS

The average TG level before plasmapheresis was 3532 mg/dl (range: 2524-4562 mg/dl; 39.9 mmol/l; range: 28.5-51.6 mmol/l). All patients made a full recovery, with a significant improvement in TG levels after plasmapheresis. The mean number of sessions was 1.3 (range 1-2), and mean TG level after plasmapheresis was 1051 mg/dl (range: 509-1771 mg/dl; 11.9 mmol/l; range: 5.8-20 mmol/l). After the first session, the average reduction of TG level was 2481 mg/dl (range 753-3750 mg/dl; 28 mmol/l; range: 8.5-42.4 mmol/l) or approximately 70%. None of the patients developed complications related to plasmapheresis.

CONCLUSIONS

Plasmapheresis can be an effective and rapid treatment option in patients with severe HTG and complications. However, further research, including randomized controlled studies, is necessary.

Comparison of the effects of fibrates versus statins on plasma lipoprotein(a) concentrations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of head-to-head randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Raised plasma lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) concentration is an independent and causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Several types of pharmacological approaches are under evaluation for their potential to reduce plasma Lp(a) levels. There is suggestive evidence that statins and fibrates, two frequently employed lipid-lowering drugs, can lower plasma Lp(a). The present study aims to compare the efficacy of fibrates and statins in reducing plasma concentrations of Lp(a) using a meta-analysis of randomized head-to-head trials.

METHODS

Medline and Scopus databases were searched to identify randomized head-to-head comparative trials investigating the efficacy of fibrates versus statins in reducing plasma Lp(a) levels. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, with inverse variance weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as summary statistics. The impact of putative confounders on the estimated effect size was explored using random effects meta-regression.

RESULTS

Sixteen head-to-head comparative trials with a total of 1388 subjects met the eligibility criteria and were selected for this meta-analysis. Meta-analysis revealed a significantly greater effect of fibrates versus statins in reducing plasma Lp(a) concentrations (WMD, -2.70 mg/dL; 95% CI, -4.56 to -0.84; P = 0.004). Combination therapy with fibrates and statins had a significantly greater effect compared with statin monotherapy (WMD, -1.60 mg/dL; 95% CI, -2.93 to -0.26; P = 0.019) but not fibrate monotherapy (WMD, -1.76 mg/dL; 95% CI, -5.44 to +1.92; P = 0.349) in reducing plasma Lp(a) concentrations. The impact of fibrates versus statins in reducing plasma Lp(a) concentrations was not found to be significantly associated with treatment duration (P = 0.788).

CONCLUSIONS

Fibrates have a significantly greater effect in reducing plasma Lp(a) concentrations than statins. Addition of fibrates to statins can enhance the Lp(a)-lowering effect of statins.

Omega-3 carboxylic acids monotherapy and combination with statins in the management of dyslipidemia

The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines on cholesterol management placed greater emphasis on statin therapy given the well-established benefits in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Residual risk may remain after statin initiation, in part because of triglyceride-rich lipoprotein cholesterol. Several large trials have failed to show benefit with non-statin cholesterol-lowering medications in the reduction of cardiovascular events. Yet, subgroup analyses showed a benefit in those with hypertriglyceridemia and lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, a high-risk pattern of dyslipidemia. This review discusses the benefits of omega-3 carboxylic acids, a recently approved formulation of omega-3 fatty acid with enhanced bioavailability, in the treatment of dyslipidemia both as monotherapy and combination therapy with a statin.

Effects of omega-3 carboxylic acids on lipoprotein particles and other cardiovascular risk markers in high-risk statin-treated patients with residual hypertriglyceridemia: a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial

Background

This study examined the effects of a mixture of highly bioavailable omega-3 carboxylic acids (OM3-CA) on nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy–assessed lipoprotein particle concentrations and sizes and other cardiovascular risk markers in statin-treated patients with fasting triglycerides (TG) ≥2.3 mmol/L (200 mg/dL) and <5.6 mmol/L (500 mg/dL) and at high cardiovascular risk.

Methods

After a diet lead-in and statin-stabilization period, 647 patients were randomly assigned to receive capsules of control (olive oil, OO) 4 g/d, OM3-CA 2 g/d (plus OO 2 g/d), or OM3-CA 4 g/d for 6 weeks.

Results

Compared with OO, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle size was increased with OM3-CA 2 g/d (p < 0.01) and 4 g/d (p < 0.001), and very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) particle sizes were decreased with both OM3-CA dosages vs. OO (p < 0.001 and p < 0.05 for VLDL and HDL, respectively). Total VLDL/chylomicron remnant particle concentration was reduced by 8.5 and 16.0 % with OM3-CA 2 and 4 g/d, respectively, vs. a 6.9 % reduction with OO (p < 0.001 for OM3-CA 4 g/d vs. OO). Total HDL particle concentration was also reduced by 1.5 and 3.2 % with OM3-CA 2 and 4 g/d, respectively, vs. a 0.6 % increase with OO (at least p < 0.05 for both comparisons). Changes in total LDL particle concentration were not significantly different for OO vs. OM3-CA at either dosage. Apolipoprotein (Apo) CIII levels decreased by 7.6 and 13.1 % with OM3-CA 2 and 4 g/d, respectively, vs. 3.2 % with OO (p < 0.001 for OM3-CA 4 g/d vs. OO). Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A₂ (Lp-PLA₂) mass was reduced by 6.2 and 10.7 % with OM3-CA 2 and 4 g/d, respectively, vs. a 0.1 % increase with OO (p < 0.001 for both vs. OO). There were no significant differences between treatments in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein responses.

Conclusion

OM3-CA were associated with shifts in lipoprotein particle sizes and concentrations, and reductions in Apo CIII and Lp-PLA₂, in patients with hypertriglyceridemia while taking a statin.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01408303.

A comparative study between Wuweizi seed and its post-ethanol extraction residue in normal and hypercholesterolemic mice

BACKGROUND

At the present, a shift from drug therapy, especially herbal therapy, to dietary supplementation is a trend in the management of dyslipidemia and related diseases. Therefore, the optimal utilization of herbal resource is important for a sustainable development of herbal medicine. Here, we compared the effects of dietary supplementation with Chinese medicine Schisandrae Chinensis Fructus seed (FSC-S) and the post-ethanol extraction residue of FSC-S (FSC-SpEt) on normal diet-fed (normal) and experimental hypercholesterolemic (HCL) mice.

METHODS

Male ICR mice (n = 10 in each group), weighing 17-21 g, were fed with normal diet (ND) or high cholesterol/bile salt (1/0.3 %, w/w) diet (HCBD) with or without supplemented with FSC-S, FSC-SpEt), or lipid-lowering agent fenofibrate (FF). Ten days later, serum/hepatic lipid and glucose (GLU) levels, body weight, organ/epididymal fat masses, and food/water intake were measured. Lipid level measurements included those of total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high density lipoprotein (HDL), low density lipoprotein (LDL), HDL/LDL ratio, LDL/HDL ratio, and non-HDL (N-HDL).

RESULTS

Supplementation with FSC-S and FSC-SpEt increased serum TC (by 64 and 25 %, respectively) and LDL (by 60 and 27 %, respectively) in normal mice. FSC-S supplementation elevated serum TC, TG, HDL, LDL, and LDL/HDL ratio (up to 64, 118, 77, 197, and 51 %, respectively) in HCL mice. FSC-SpEt supplementation reduced serum TG (by 15 %) and LDL/HDL ratio (by 18 %), as well as increased serum HDL (by 22 %) and HDL/LDL ratio (by 21 %) in HCBD-fed mice. FSC-S decreased hepatic TC (by 19 %) contents and increased hepatic TG contents by 14 % in normal mice. FSC-S reduced hepatic GLU level in both normal and HCL mice by 24 and 22 %, respectively. Hepatic TC and TG contents were lowered in FSC-SpEt-supplemented normal mice by 16 and 20 %, respectively. The body/fatty masse and food intake were lowered, but the feed efficiency index (FEI), weight gain per unit of food ingested, was increased in FSC-S-supplemented normal and HCL mice. FF supplements reduced serum/hepatic lipids, hepatic GLU contents, and epididymal fat mass, but it induced hepatomegaly and high serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) activity in normal and/or HCL mice.

CONCLUSION

The ensemble of results indicated that while FSC-SpEt supplementation is beneficial for the treatment of hyperlipidemia/fatty liver, FSC-S is potentially useful for the management of overweight/obesity.

Lipid-lowering efficacy of atorvastatin

BACKGROUND

This represents the first update of this review, which was published in 2012. Atorvastatin is one of the most widely prescribed drugs and the most widely prescribed statin in the world. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of atorvastatin on blood lipids.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of atorvastatin on serum total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol and triglycerides in individuals with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease. The primary focus of this review was determination of the mean per cent change from baseline of LDL-cholesterol. Secondary objectives • To quantify the variability of effects of various doses of atorvastatin.• To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 11, 2013), MEDLINE (1966 to December Week 2 2013), EMBASE (1980 to December Week 2 2013), Web of Science (1899 to December Week 2 2013) and BIOSIS Previews (1969 to December Week 2 2013). We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of atorvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included and extracted data. We collected information on withdrawals due to adverse effects from placebo-controlled trials.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we found an additional 42 trials and added them to the original 254 studies. The update consists of 296 trials that evaluated dose-related efficacy of atorvastatin in 38,817 participants. Included are 242 before-and-after trials and 54 placebo-controlled RCTs. Log dose-response data from both trial designs revealed linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides. The Summary of findings table 1 documents the effect of atorvastatin on LDL-cholesterol over the dose range of 10 to 80 mg/d, which is the range for which this systematic review acquired the greatest quantity of data. Over this range, blood LDL-cholesterol is decreased by 37.1% to 51.7% (Summary of findings table 1). The slope of dose-related effects on cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol was similar for atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, but rosuvastatin is about three-fold more potent. Subgroup analyses suggested that the atorvastatin effect was greater in females than in males and was greater in non-familial than in familial hypercholesterolaemia. Risk of bias for the outcome of withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) was high, but the mostly unclear risk of bias was judged unlikely to affect lipid measurements. Withdrawals due to adverse effects were not statistically significantly different between atorvastatin and placebo groups in these short-term trials (risk ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.40).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update resulted in no change to the main conclusions of the review but significantly increases the strength of the evidence. Studies show that atorvastatin decreases blood total cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol in a linear dose-related manner over the commonly prescribed dose range. New findings include that atorvastatin is more than three-fold less potent than rosuvastatin, and that the cholesterol-lowering effects of atorvastatin are greater in females than in males and greater in non-familial than in familial hypercholesterolaemia. This review update does not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with atorvastatin because included trials were of short duration and adverse effects were not reported in 37% of placebo-controlled trials.

Absence of a significant pharmacokinetic interaction between atorvastatin and fenofibrate: a randomized, crossover, study of a fixed-dose formulation in healthy Mexican subjects

Several clinical trials have substantiated the efficacy of the co-administration of statins like atorvastatin (ATO) and fibrates. Without information currently available about the interaction between the two drugs, a pharmacokinetic study was conducted to investigate the effect when both drugs were co-administered. The purpose of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic profile of tablets containing ATO 20 mg, or the combination of ATO 20 mg with fenofibrate (FNO) 160 mg administered to healthy Mexican volunteers. This was a randomized, two-period, two-sequence, crossover study; 36 eligible subjects aged between 20-50 years were included. Blood samples were collected up to 96 h after dosing, and pharmacokinetic parameters were obtained by non-compartmental analysis. Adverse events were evaluated based on subject interviews and physical examinations. Area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax) were measured for ATO as the reference and ATO and FNO as the test product for bioequivalence design. The estimation computed (90% confidence intervals) for ATO and FNO combination versus ATO for Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-∞, were 102,09, 125,95, and 120,97%, respectively. These results suggest that ATO and FNO have no relevant clinical-pharmacokinetic drug interaction.

A Review of Currently Available Fenofibrate and Fenofibric Acid Formulations

Fenofibrate is a third-generation fibric acid derivative indicated as a monotherapy to reduce elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and apolipoprotein B; to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia; and to reduce triglycerides in patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia. In this review, the key characteristics of available fenofibrate formulations are examined. A literature search was conducted, focusing on comparative studies examining bioavailability, food effects, absorption, and lipid efficacy. Fenofibrate is highly lipophilic, virtually insoluble in water, and poorly absorbed. Coadministration with meals was necessary to maximize bioavailability of early formulations. Micronized and nanoparticle formulations of fenofibrate with reduced particle sizes were developed, resulting in greater solubility, improved bioavailability, and in some cases, the ability to be given irrespective of food. A recently introduced hydrophilic choline salt of fenofibric acid also can be taken without regard to meals, is absorbed throughout the gastrointestinal tract, has the highest bioavailability among marketed formulations, and is approved for coadministration with a statin. Differences in bioavailability of fenofibrate formulations have resulted in low-dose (40 - 67) mg and standard-dose (120 - 200 mg) formulations. Different formulations are not equivalent on a milligram-to-milligram basis. In order to prevent medication errors, resulting in underdosing or overdosing with attendant consequences, it is important for healthcare providers to recognize that the formulations of fenofibrate and fenofibric acid that are currently available vary substantially in relation to food effect, equivalency on a milligram-to-milligram basis, and indication to be coadministered with a statin.

Lipid lowering efficacy of atorvastatin

BACKGROUND

Atorvastatin is one of the most widely prescribed drugs and the most widely prescribed statin in the world. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of atorvastatin on blood lipids.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the dose-related effects of atorvastatin on blood lipids and withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAE).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2011, MEDLINE (1966 to November 2011), EMBASE (1980 to November 2011), ISI Web of Science (1899 to November 2011) and BIOSIS Previews (1969 to November 2011). No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of atorvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of 3 to 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. WDAE information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-four trials evaluated the dose-related efficacy of atorvastatin in 33,505 participants. Log dose-response data revealed linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol and triglycerides. Combining all the trials using the generic inverse variance fixed-effect model for doses of 10 to 80 mg/day resulted in decreases of 36% to 53% for LDL-cholesterol. There was no significant dose-related effects of atorvastatin on blood high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol. WDAE were not statistically different between atorvastatin and placebo for these short-term trials (risk ratio 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.45).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and triglyceride lowering effect of atorvastatin was dependent on dose. Log dose-response data was linear over the commonly prescribed dose range. Manufacturer-recommended atorvastatin doses of 10 to 80 mg/day resulted in 36% to 53% decreases of LDL-cholesterol. The review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with atorvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 37% of the placebo-controlled 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.

Simvastatin but not bezafibrate decreases plasma lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A₂ mass in type 2 diabetes mellitus: relevance of high sensitive C-reactive protein, lipoprotein profile and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) electronegativity

OBJECTIVE

Plasma lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) (Lp-PLA(2)) levels predict incident cardiovascular disease, impacting Lp-PLA(2) as an emerging therapeutic target. We determined Lp-PLA(2) responses to statin and fibrate administration in type 2 diabetes mellitus, and assessed relationships of changes in Lp-PLA(2) with subclinical inflammation and lipoprotein characteristics.

METHODS

A placebo-controlled cross-over study (three 8-week treatment periods with simvastatin (40 mg daily), bezafibrate (400mg daily) and their combination) was carried out in 14 male type 2 diabetic patients. Plasma Lp-PLA(2) mass was measured by turbidimetric immunoassay.

RESULTS

Plasma Lp-PLA(2) decreased (-21 ± 4%) in response to simvastatin (p<0.05 from baseline and placebo), but was unaffected by bezafibrate (1 ± 5%). The drop in Lp-PLA(2) during combined treatment (-17 ± 3%, p<0.05) was similar compared to that during simvastatin alone. The Lp-PLA(2) changes during the 3 active lipid lowering treatment periods were related positively to baseline levels of high sensitive C-reactive protein, non-HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, the total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol ratio and less LDL electronegativity (p<0.02 to p<0.01), and inversely to baseline Lp-PLA(2) (p<0.01). LpPLA(2) responses correlated inversely with changes in non-HDL cholesterol, triglycerides and the total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol ratio during treatment (p<0.05 to p<0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In type 2 diabetes mellitus, plasma Lp-PLA(2) is likely to be lowered by statin treatment only. Enhanced subclinical inflammation and more severe dyslipidemia may predict diminished LpPLA(2) responses during lipid lowering treatment, which in turn appear to be quantitatively dissociated from decreases in apolipoprotein B lipoproteins. Conventional lipid lowering treatment may be insufficient for optimal LpPLA(2) lowering in diabetes mellitus.

Variation of lipoprotein associated phospholipase A2 across demographic characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Lipoprotein association phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA(2)), an enzyme which has been found in atherosclerotic plaque is currently under investigation in large Phase III clinical trials of vascular disease prevention. We assessed in a variety of different population settings variation of Lp-PLA(2) mass and activity across gender, ethnicity, diabetes, kidney disease and metabolic syndrome. We also assessed correlations with measures of circulating lipids, systemic inflammation and adiposity.

METHODS

Systematic review of studies measuring Lp-PLA(2) and at least one of the relevant characteristics in >50 participants.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 77 studies involving 102,499 participants meeting the inclusion criteria. Lp-PLA(2) mass and activity were consistently approximately 10% higher in males than females and 15% higher in Caucasians than African Americans or Hispanics. There were no clear associations of Lp-PLA(2) mass or activity with type II diabetes, markers of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein, fibrinogen) or with body mass index. Correlations of Lp-PLA(2) mass or activity with low density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were moderate and positive, whilst correlations with high density lipoprotein cholesterol were negative and moderate to weak. There was no clear differences in associations with any of the above characteristics in groups defined based upon prevalent cardiovascular disease or its risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite considerable variability in absolute levels of Lp-PLA(2) across studies, the variability of Lp-PLA(2) across gender, ethnicity, and levels of circulating lipids and markers of systemic inflammation are more consistent and appear not to vary importantly across categories defined by CVD or its risk factors.

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.

Non-lipid effects of rosuvastatin-fenofibrate combination therapy in high-risk Asian patients with mixed hyperlipidemia

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the non-lipid effects of rosuvastatin-fenofibrate combination therapy with rosuvastatin monotherapy in high-risk Asian patients with mixed hyperlipidemia.

METHODS

A total of 236 patients were initially screened. After six weeks of diet and life style changes, 180 of these patients were randomly assigned to receive one of two regimens: rosuvastatin 10 mg plus fenofibrate 160 mg or rosuvastatin 10 mg. The primary outcome variables were the incidences of muscle or liver enzyme elevation. The patients were followed for 24 weeks during drug treatment and for an additional four weeks after drug discontinuation.

RESULTS

The rates of the primary outcome variables were similar between the two groups (2.8% and 3.9% in the combination and the rosuvastatin groups, respectively, p=1.00). The combination group had more, but not significantly, common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) (13.3% and 5.6%, respectively) and drug discontinuation due to AEs (10.0% and 3.3%, respectively) than the rosouvastatin group. Combination therapy was associated with higher elevations in homocysteine, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine, whereas elevation in alanine aminotransferase was greater in the rosuvastatin group. Leukocyte count and hemoglobin level decreased to a greater extent in the combination group. The combination group showed greater reductions in TG and elevation in HDL-cholesterol.

CONCLUSION

In our study population, the rosuvastatin-fenofibrate combination resulted in comparable incidences of myo- or hepatotoxicity as rosuvastatin monotherapy. However, this combination may need to be used with caution in individuals with underlying pathologies such as renal dysfunction (NCT01414803).

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.

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.

Optimal pharmacologic approach to patients with hypertriglyceridemia and low high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol: randomized comparison of fenofibrate 160 mg and niacin 1500 mg

OBJECTIVES

Atherogenic dyslipidemia is emerging as a target of lipid-modifying therapy. However, an optimal pharmacologic approach has not yet been established. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and tolerability of the typical doses of fenofibrate and niacin.

METHODS

After an eight-week dietary run-in, 201 patients who had triglyceride (TG) levels of 150-499 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) levels of <45 mg/dL and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels of <130 mg/dL were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups for 16 weeks: fenofibrate 160 mg or niacin extended release 1500 mg (starting at 500 mg and up-titrated at the fifth and ninth weeks).

RESULTS

One hundred forty patients completed the study. The percent reductions in apoB/A1 were not different between the two groups (-20% and -22% in the fenofibrate and niacin groups, respectively, p=0.47). The effects of the two regimens on HDL-C were similar (24% and 20%, respectively, p=0.22), while fenofibrate reduced TG more than did niacin (-53% and -48%, respectively, p=0.045). Niacin was more effective at lowering LDL-C, Lp (a), and hs-CRP. However, niacin worsened the parameters of glycemic control, whereas fenofibrate improved them. Niacin showed more frequent adverse events including pruritus and skin flushing.

CONCLUSIONS

These two regimens have largely comparable lipid-modifying effects. However, their effects on glucose metabolism and inflammation, and their adverse events need to be considered additionally. Our results underscore more individualized pharmacologic approaches to patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia.