Intense cholesterol lowering therapy with a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor does not improve nitric oxide dependent endothelial function in type-2-diabetes--a multicenter, randomised, double-blind, three-arm placebo-controlled clinical trial

Effects of statin therapy on glycemic control and insulin resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To update the evidence about the diabetogenic effect of statins.

METHODS

We searched for randomized-controlled trials reporting the effects of statin therapy on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and/or homeostatic model insulin resistance (i.e., HOMA-IR) as indexes of diabetes. Studies were classified between the ones testing normal vs individuals with already altered glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 6.5%; and HOMA-IR ≥ 2.15). Furthermore, studies were separated by statin type and dosage prescribed. Data are presented as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 67 studies were included in the analysis (>25,000 individuals). In individuals with altered glycemic control, statins increased HbA1c levels (MD 0.21%, 95% CI 0.16-to-0.25) and HOMA-IR index (MD 0.31, 95% CI 0.24-to-0.38). In individuals with normal glycemic control, statin increased HbA1c (MD 1.33%, 95% CI 1.31-to-1.35) and HOMA-IR (MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.41-to-0.58) in comparison to the placebo groups. The dose or type of statins did not modulate the diabetogenic effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Statins, slightly but significantly raise indexes of diabetes in individuals with adequate or altered glycemic control. The diabetogenic effect does not seem to be influenced by the type or dosage of statin prescribed.

Pharmacological effects of statins in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to contradicting findings on impact of statins on endothelial function in type 2 diabetes mellitus especially across the randomized controlled trials (RCTs). With this systematic review, we aim to evaluate whether the use of statins improves endothelial function in adults with type 2 diabetes. We will further highlight if these biomarkers are ideal therapeutic targets for risk for atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

This protocol was carried out according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols-2015 guideline. The online databases, such as MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Sciences, will be targeted using the medical subject heading terms (MeSH) and text words. The review will include clinical studies on the effect of statins on markers of endothelial function in type 2 diabetes. The Cochrane risk of bias guideline will be used to assess the quality and risk of bias. We are planning to use the grading of recommendation assessment, development, and evaluation approach to evaluate the strength and quality of evidence.

RESULTS

This study will not involve human samples and patient data; hence ethics approval will not be required. The findings will be presented in journal clubs and conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Cerivastatin for lowering lipids

BACKGROUND

Cerivastatin was the most potent statin until it was withdrawn from the market due to a number of fatalities due to rhabdomyolysis, however, the dose-related magnitude of effect of cerivastatin on blood lipids is not known.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of cerivastatin on the surrogate markers: LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides in children and adults with and without cardiovascular disease. The aim of this review is to examine the pharmacology of cerivastatin by characterizing the dose-related effect and variability of the effect of cerivastatin on surrogate markers. Secondary objectives To quantify the effect of various doses of cerivastatin compared to placebo on withdrawals due to adverse effects. To compare the relative potency of cerivastatin with respect to fluvastatin, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin for LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for RCTs up to March 2019: CENTRAL (2019, Issue 3), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov.We also searched the European Patent Office, FDA.gov, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and controlled before-and-after studies evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of cerivastatin 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 trials to be included and extracted data. We entered data from RCTs and controlled before-and-after studies into Review Manager 5 as continuous and generic inverse variance data respectively. We collected information on withdrawals due to adverse effects from the RCTs. We assessed all trials using the 'Risk of bias' tool under the categories of sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other potential biases.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty trials (19 RCTs and 31 before-and-after studies) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of cerivastatin in 12,877 participants who had their LDL cholesterol measured. The participants were of any age with and without cardiovascular disease and the trials studied cerivastatin effects within a treatment period of three to 12 weeks. Cerivastatin 0.025 mg/day to 0.8 mg/day caused LDL cholesterol decreases of 11.0% to 40.8%, total cholesterol decreases of 8.0% to 28.8% and triglyceride decreases of 9.0% to 21.4%. We judged the certainty of evidence for these effects to be high. Log dose-response data over doses of 2.5 mg to 80 mg revealed strong linear dose-related effects on LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol and triglycerides. When compared to fluvastatin, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, cerivastatin was about 250-fold more potent than fluvastatin, 20-fold more potent than atorvastatin and 5.5-fold more potent than rosuvastatin at reducing LDL cholesterol; 233-fold more potent than fluvastatin, 18-fold more potent than atorvastatin and six-fold more potent than rosuvastatin at reducing total cholesterol; and 125-fold more potent than fluvastatin, 11-fold more potent than atorvastatin and 13-fold more potent than rosuvastatin at reducing triglycerides. There was no dose-related effect of cerivastatin on HDL cholesterol, but overall cerivastatin increased HDL cholesterol by 5%. There was a high risk of bias for the outcome withdrawals due to adverse effects, but a low risk of bias for the lipid measurements. Withdrawals due to adverse effects were not different between cerivastatin and placebo in 11 of 19 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.74).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and triglyceride lowering effect of cerivastatin was linearly dependent on dose. Cerivastatin log dose-response data were linear over the commonly prescribed dose range. Based on an informal comparison with fluvastatin, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, cerivastatin was about 250-fold more potent than fluvastatin, 20-fold more potent than atorvastatin and 5.5-fold more potent than rosuvastatin in reducing LDL cholesterol, and 233-fold greater potency than fluvastatin, 18-fold greater potency than atorvastatin and six-fold greater potency than rosuvastatin at reducing total cholesterol. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with cerivastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 42% of the RCTs.

A pilot study of ezetimibe vs. atorvastatin for improving peripheral microvascular endothelial function in stable patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Elevated cholesterol in type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) can cause endothelial dysfunction. An effective clinical therapy to improve endothelial dysfunction remains to be established. Different cardiovascular actions between treatments for the inhibition of cholesterol absorption and the suppression of cholesterol synthesis for achieving improvement in endothelial function are unknown in DM.

METHODS

Stable patients with type 2 DM and mildly elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were enrolled. We evaluated peripheral microvascular endothelial function using reactive hyperemia peripheral arterial tonometry (RH-PAT) examination and calculated a natural logarithmic transformed value for the RH-PAT index (LnRHI). We randomly assigned 33 patients to each monotherapy: cholesterol synthesis suppression using atorvastatin (5 mg/day, n=16) or cholesterol absorption inhibition using ezetimibe (10 mg/day, n=17). Patients were prospectively followed for 6 months. Serum lipids and LnRHI were repeatedly examined before and after each therapy.

RESULTS

LDL significantly decreased in both groups, but the percent changes of LDL showed a greater decrease in the atorvastatin group compared with the ezetimibe group (-34.5±7.8% vs. -21.9±9.6%, p<0.01). Serum levels of non-esterified free fatty acids (NEFA) significantly decreased in the ezetimibe group but not in the atorvastatin group (ezetimibe group: 561.1±236.8 to 429.7±195.9, p<0.01; atorvastatin group: 538.8±319.5 to 520.2±227.3, p=0.75). The percent decrease in NEFA was significantly greater in the ezetimibe group compared with the atorvastatin group (-19.9±27.4% vs. 11.3±44.1%, p<0.05). LnRHI showed a significant increase in the ezetimibe group but not in the atorvastatin group (ezetimibe group: 0.471±0.157 to 0.678±0.187, p<0.01; atorvastatin group: 0.552±0.084 to 0.558±0.202, p=0.64). The percent changes in LnRHI were significantly greater in the ezetimibe group compared with the atorvastatin group (63.3±89.2% vs. 7.4±41.2%, p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 DM, ezetimibe monotherapy significantly reduced LDL and NEFA, and improved peripheral microvascular endothelial dysfunction. Ezetimibe could potentially exhibit beneficial effects on lipid disorders and microvascular endothelial dysfunction in DM.

Endothelial dysfunction in diabetes: pathogenesis, significance, and treatment

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) markedly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. Endothelial dysfunction (ED), an early indicator of diabetic vascular disease, is common in T2D and independently predicts cardiovascular risk. Although the precise pathogenic mechanisms for ED in T2D remain unclear, at inception they probably involve uncoupling of both endothelial nitric oxide synthase activity and mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, as well as the activation of vascular nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase. The major contributing factors include dyslipoproteinemia, oxidative stress, and inflammation. Therapeutic interventions are designed to target these pathophysiological factors that underlie ED. Therapeutic interventions, including lifestyle changes, antiglycemic agents and lipid-regulating therapies, aim to correct hyperglycemia and atherogenic dyslipidemia and to improve ED. However, high residual cardiovascular risk is seen in both research and clinical practice settings. Well-designed studies of endothelial function in appropriately selected volunteers afford a good opportunity to test new therapeutic interventions, paving the way for clinical trials and utilization in the care of the diabetic patient. However, based on the results from a recent clinical trial, niacin should not be added to a statin in individuals with low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and very well controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

Statin therapy on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) indicate that statin therapy has cardiovascular benefit among patients with type 2 diabetes. Recently, statins were reported to increase risk of diabetes by 9%. The aim was to investigate by a meta-analysis whether statins deteriorate glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1966 to 2012 were searched for RCTs of statins. Included were only trials with type 2 diabetes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The I(2) statistic was used to measure heterogeneity between trials and calculated mean differences for glycaemic parameters with random-effect meta-analysis.

RESULTS

26 eligible studies were identified with 3232 participants. Statin therapy had no remarkable influence on HbA1c (WMD 0.04%, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.16, I² = 45.7%, n = 3070), FPG (2.25 mg/dl, 95% CI -3.50 to 7.99, I² = 46%, n = 1176), BMI, fasting insulin or HOMA-IR. However, subgroup analysis showed significant, detrimental effect of atorvastatin on HbA1c, whereas simvastatin presented an ameliorative effect. Meta-regression presented that neither baseline age nor relative reduction in LDL-cholesterol concentrations accounted for residual heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Statin therapy showed non-significant effect on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes. Statin therapy need not change among them with moderate or high cardiovascular risk or existing cardiovascular disease.

Does brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation provide a bioassay for NO?

This study sought to better define the role of NO in brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) in young, healthy humans. Brachial artery blood velocity and diameter were determined (ultrasound Doppler) in 8 volunteers (26 ± 1 year) before and after 5-minute forearm circulatory occlusion with and without intra-arterial infusion of the endothelial NO synthase inhibitor N(G)-monomethyl-L-arginine (L-NMMA; 0.48 mg/dL per minute). Control (CON) and L-NMMA trials were performed with the occlusion cuff placed in the traditional distal position, as well as proximal to the measurement site. FMD was significantly reduced, but not abolished, by L-NMMA in the distal cuff trial (8.9 ± 1.3%-6.0 ± 0.7%, CON versus L-NMMA; P=0.02), with no effect of L-NMMA on FMD with proximal cuff placement (10.6 ± 1.2%-12.4 ± 1.7%, CON versus L-NMMA; P=0.39). When the reduction in shear stimulus after L-NMMA was taken into account, no drug difference was observed for either distal (0.26 ± 0.02-0.23 ± 0.03, CON versus L-NMMA; P=0.40) or proximal (0.23 ± 0.08-0.23 ± 0.03, CON versus L-NMMA; P=0.89) FMD trials. These findings challenge the assertion that NO is obligatory for brachial artery FMD and call into question the sensitivity of this procedure for noninvasive determination of NO bioavailability in young, healthy humans.

The effects of statins on blood pressure in normotensive or hypertensive subjects--a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate whether statin therapy is associated with blood pressure (BP)-lowering in patients with or without hypertension.

BACKGROUND

The beneficial effects of statins on the cardiovascular system may in part be related to effects beyond lipid-lowering. It has been suggested that statins may reduce BP; however the available data are still ambiguous and often conflicting.

METHODS

Data from Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for the years 1966-January 2012 were searched for studies that investigated the effect of statins on BP in normotensive or in hypertensive subjects. We included all randomized controlled clinical trials that investigated this effect. Changes in systolic and diastolic BP were the key outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 18 trials and 5628 subjects (4692 normotensive and 936 hypertensive patients) randomized to receive either statins or placebo. The weighted mean difference of systolic (∆SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (∆DBP) in normotensive patients for the 11 statin trials included were 0.03 (95% CI: -0.95-1.02; p = 0.95) and -0.28 (95% CI: -0.80-0.24; p = 0.29), respectively. For hypertensive patients treated with statins (8 trials) the weighted mean difference of ∆SBP and ∆DBP were 1.45 (95% CI: -0.49-3.39; p = 0.14) and -1.32 (95% CI: -3.93-1.28; p = 0.32) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite previous suggestions statin therapy in normotensive or hypertensive patients does not lead to significant reductions in systolic or diastolic BP.

Antihypertensive effects of statins: a meta-analysis of prospective controlled studies

In experimental studies, statins have been shown to lower blood pressure through increased nitric oxide bioavailability and improved arterial compliance. The clinical significance of this effect remains poorly documented. The authors performed a meta-analysis of the effect of statins on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) including prospective randomized, controlled trials of statin therapy. EMBASE and MEDLINE searches for studies in which patients were randomized to treatment with a statin plus standard treatment (or placebo) vs standard treatment (or placebo) were conducted. Studies that provided data on SBP and DBP values before the initiation of the treatment and at the end of the follow-up period were included. A total of 40 studies with 51 comparison groups examining 22,511 controls and 22,602 patients taking statins were examined. Mean SBP in the statin group decreased by 2.62 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.41 to -1.84; P<.001) and DBP by 0.94 mm Hg (95% CI, -1.31 to -0.57; P<.001). In studies including hypertensive patients, the decrease in blood pressures with statins was slightly greater (SBP, -3.07 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.00 to -2.15 and DBP, 1.04; 95% CI, -1.47 to -0.61). Similarly, statins effectively reduced SBP in diabetic patients. In this large meta-analysis of prospective controlled studies, the authors found a small but statistically significant reduction of SBP in patients taking statins. The decrease in blood pressure may contribute to the pleiotropic effect of statins in reducing cardiovascular risk.

High-dose statin monotherapy versus low-dose statin/ezetimibe combination on fasting and postprandial lipids and endothelial function in obese patients with the metabolic syndrome: The PANACEA study

BACKGROUND

Low-dose statin therapy in combination with ezetimibe, an inhibitor of intestinal cholesterol absorption, lowers plasma LDL-cholesterol levels to a similar degree as high-dose statin monotherapy. This study assessed whether similar LDL-cholesterol lowering with simvastatin/ezetimibe combination therapy improves fasting and postprandial arterial endothelial function compared to high-dose statin therapy alone.

METHODS

Multicenter, double-blind, crossover trial in 100 abdominally obese patients with the metabolic syndrome, randomized to 6 weeks' treatment with simvastatin 80 mg or simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg. Flow mediated dilatation (FMD) and peripheral arterial tonometry (EndoPAT) as well as plasma lipids were measured in the fasting state and after an oral lipid load at baseline and after both treatments.

RESULTS

Fasting LDL-cholesterol levels (3.57 mmol/L at baseline) were reduced to 1.79 mmol/L following treatment with simvastatin 80 mg and 1.81 mmol/L with simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg, respectively. Plasma lipids were similar at 4 h after an oral lipid load following both treatments for 6 weeks. Fasting endothelial function was also similar with both treatments when assessed by FMD (adjusted mean ± SE: 4.35 ± 0.19 vs. 4.43 ± 0.18; P = 0.777) and EndoPAT (2.12 ± 0.05 vs 2.20 ± 0.05; P = 0.304). After an oral fat load, changes in endothelial function were also comparable for both treatments as assessed by FMD (-0.34 ± 0.21 vs. -0.43 ± 0.20; P = 0.766) and EndoPAT (0.00 ± 0.07 vs. -0.04 ± 0.08; P = 0.712).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg induced no difference in endothelial function in the fasting and postprandial state compared to simvastatin 80 mg while attaining similar LDL-c levels in obese patients with metabolic syndrome.

Effect of Lacidipine on Blood Pressure and Endothelial Function in Mild-to-Moderate Essential Hypertension Patients With Diabetes in Korea

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of lacidipine in reducing blood pressure (BP) and to determine its effect on endothelial function in mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study, enrolling 290 patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension and type 2 DM. Patients were initially treated with 2 mg lacidipine orally once daily for 4 weeks, which was then increased as necessary every 4 weeks to a maximal dose of 6 mg daily. The primary endpoint was the mean change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) from baseline after 12 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints included mean changes in diastolic blood pressure (DBP), flow-mediated vasodilatation (FMD), and serum concentrations of biochemical markers such as high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), monocyte chemo-attractant protein-1 (MCP-1), matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9), and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1).

RESULTS

Lacidipine treatment significantly reduced SBP by -13.4±13.0 mmHg (p<0.001) and DBP by -6.2±9.3 mmHg (p<0.001). Lacidipine treatment did not improve endothelial-dependent vasodilatation, despite significantly improved nitroglycerin-induced, endothelial-independent vasodilatation. MCP-1 levels significantly decreased from 283.66±110.08 pg/mL to 257.83±100.23 pg/mL (p<0.001); whereas there were no significant changes in the levels of hs-CRP, MMP-9, or PAI-1.

CONCLUSION

Twelve weeks of treatment with lacidipine was effective and well tolerated in mild-to-moderate hypertensive patients with type 2 DM. In spite of inducing a significant reduction in MCP-1 levels, lacidipine did not improve endothelial function.

The relationship between endothelial dysfunction and oxidative stress in diabetes and prediabetes

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes mellitus is associated with endothelial dysfunction and oxidative stress (OS). The aim of the present study was to determine whether increased OS and impaired endothelial function, are present in early states of diabetes, such as impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and impaired fasting glucose (IFG).

METHODS

Brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) and nitrate-induced dilatation were measured in 133 subjects with carbohydrate abnormalities (45 IGT, 44 IFG and 44 Type 2 diabetes mellitus) and in 46 subjects with normal glucose tolerance (NGT). Waist circumference, body mass index, blood pressure and fasting lipid profiles were obtained, and glucose and insulin values in response to a 75-g oral glucose load were also measured. Plasma malondialdehyde (MDA) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity were determined.

RESULTS

Patients with diabetes and prediabetes had a higher plasma MDA concentration, but a lower plasma SOD activity than the NGT group (p = 0.006) and SOD activity was positively associated with FMD (p = 0.039). FMD were significantly reduced in the groups of subjects with abnormal carbohydrate metabolism compared with the NGT group (p = 0.035). Among the subjects with diabetes and prediabetes, FMD showed a negative correlation with fasting glucose and/or plasma glucose level at 120 min after oral glucose tolerance test (p = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed that endothelial dysfunction and increased OS were present in subjects with IGT and IFG, indicating endothelial damage in these stages.

Therapeutic regulation of endothelial dysfunction in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Endothelial dysfunction is universal in diabetes, being intimately involved with the development of cardiovascular disease. The pathogenesis of endothelial dysfunction in diabetes is complex. It is initially related to the effects of fatty acids and insulin resistance on 'uncoupling' of both endothelial nitric oxide synthase activity and mitochondrial function. Oxidative stress activates protein kinase C (PKC), polyol, hexosamine and nuclear factor kappa B pathways, thereby aggravating endothelial dysfunction. Improvements in endothelial function in the peripheral circulation in diabetes have been demonstrated with monotherapies, including statins, fibrates, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, metformin and fish oils. These observations are supported by large clinical end point trials. Other studies show benefits with certain antioxidants, L-arginine, folate, PKC-inhibitors, peroxisome proliferator activated receptor (PPAR)-alpha and -gamma agonists and phosphodiesterase (PDE-5) inhibitors. However, the benefits of these agents remain to be shown in clinical end point trials. Combination treatments, for example, statins plus ACE inhibitors and statins plus fibrates, have also been demonstrated to have additive benefits on endothelial function in diabetes, but there are no clinical outcome data to date. Measurement of endothelial dysfunction in cardiovascular research can provide fresh opportunities for exploring the mechanism of benefit of new therapeutic regimens and for planning and designing large clinical trials.

Low-density lipoprotein-dependent and -independent effects of cholesterol-lowering therapies on C-reactive protein: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess the contribution of low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-dependent and LDL-independent effects of LDL-lowering therapies to changes in C-reactive protein (CRP) in healthy or stable subjects.

BACKGROUND

Correlations of change in LDL and CRP in individuals are lowered by their measurement variability. By using average changes in LDL and CRP in study groups, meta-analysis reduces this variability to better assess their correlation.

METHODS

A systematic search for randomized placebo-controlled trials reporting change in LDL and CRP with LDL-lowering interventions retrieved 23 studies with 57 groups treated with a variety of statins, nonstatin drugs, or other regimens. Meta-analysis techniques assessed the relationships between average mean differences (placebo - treatment) in change in CRP and LDL.

RESULTS

The overall reduction in CRP was 28% (95% confidence interval 26% to 30%). Significantly greater CRP reduction occurred in statin and statin-ezetimibe interventions, interventions using 80 mg/day of statins, and with greater LDL lowering. Meta-regression analysis showed a strong correlation between the change in LDL and CRP (r = 0.80, p < 0.001). Statin therapies had no significant effect on CRP after adjusting for the change in LDL. In a multivariate model applied to a range of LDL reduction typically seen with statins (20% to 60%), 89% to 98% of CRP change was related to LDL lowering and 2% to 11% was related to non-LDL effects of statins.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, most of the anti-inflammatory effect of LDL-lowering therapies is related to the magnitude of change in LDL. The potential non-LDL effects of statins on inflammation are much smaller in magnitude.

Do Statins Reduce Blood Pressure?

A meta-analysis was performed of the effect of 3hydroxy3methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) on blood pressure in humans including the randomized, controlled trials of statin therapy (20 trials and 828 patients) in which concomitant antihypertensive treatment (if any) remained unchanged throughout the study. A total of 291 and 272 patients were given a statin or placebo, respectively, in parallel group trials, whereas 265 took part in crossover trials receiving a statin and placebo (or probucol, in 1 trial). Systolic blood pressure was significantly lower in patients on statin than in those on placebo or control hypolipidemic drug (mean difference: -1.9 mm Hg; 95% CI: -3.8 to -0.1). The effect was greater when the analysis was restricted to studies with a baseline systolic blood pressure >130 mm Hg (Delta systolic blood pressure: -4.0; 95% CI: -5.8 to -2.2 mm Hg). There was a trend for lower diastolic blood pressure in patients receiving statin therapy compared with control: -0.9 mm Hg (95% CI: -2.0 to 0.2) overall and -1.2 mm Hg (95% CI: -2.6 to 0.1) in studies with a baseline diastolic blood pressure >80 mm Hg. In general, the higher the baseline blood pressure, the greater the effect of statins on blood pressure (P=0.066 for systolic blood pressure and P=0.023 for diastolic blood pressure). The blood pressure response to statins was unrelated to age, changes in serum cholesterol, or length of the trial. In conclusion, statin therapy has a relatively small but statistically significant and clinically meaningful effect on blood pressure.

Atorvastatin normalizes endothelial function in healthy smokers

Endothelial function is known to predict cardiovascular disease. The aim of the present study was to examine whether endothelial function in smokers with normal cholesterol levels could be normalized by treatment with 80 mg of atorvastatin in comparison with a control group. Healthy smokers (n=20) and non-smokers (n=20) were randomized to receive 80 mg of atorvastatin or placebo in an open randomized cross-over study, followed by measurement of endothelial functional [FMD (flow-mediated dilation)]. At baseline, smokers had a lower FMD compared with the non-smoking group (2.2+/-0.5 and 4.5+/-0.8% respectively; P<0.05). In the smoking group, FMD increased significantly (P<0.05) to 4.0+/-0.8% during treatment with atorvastatin and returned to basal levels during placebo (2.3+/-0.6%). In the non-smoking group, FMD was unaffected by both atorvastatin and placebo. The net change of total cholesterol or LDL (low-density lipoprotein)-cholesterol was not associated with the net change in FMD when the study group was considered as a whole or the smoking group was considered separately. In conclusion, improved endothelial function was observed in a group of smokers when they were received 80 mg of atorvastatin, whereas atorvastatin had no effect on endothelial function in the non-smoking group. The improved FMD among smokers was independent of the decrease in LDL-cholesterol during atorvastatin treatment. The results show that poor endothelial function in smokers with normal lipid levels can be improved by a statin treatment.

Effect of repaglinide on endothelial dysfunction during a glucose tolerance test in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance

BACKGROUND

Impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. The pathophysiological mechanisms linking post-challenge hyperglycemia to accelerated atherosclerosis, however remain to be elucidated.

METHODS

A prospective, open, randomised, cross-over study was performed to investigate the effect of 2 mg repaglinide on hyperglycemia and endothelial function during an oral glucose tolerance test (75 g glucose) in 12 subjects with diagnosed IGT. Blood samples for determination of plasma glucose were drawn fasting, 1 and 2 hours after glucose ingestion. Endothelial function was assessed by measuring flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) of the brachial artery with high-resolution ultrasound.

RESULTS

Administration of repaglinide resulted in a significant reduction of plasma glucose at 2 hours (172.8+/-48.4 vs. 138.3+/-41.2 mg/dl; p < 0.001). The flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) 2 hours after the glucose-load was significantly reduced in comparison to fasting in the control group (6.21+/-2.69 vs. 7.98+/-2.24 %; p = 0.028), whereas after theadministration of repaglinide the FMD was not significantly different to fasting values (7.24+/-2.57 vs. 8.18+/-2.93 %; p = n.s.). Linear and logistic regression analysis revealed that only the change of glucose was significantly correlated to the change of FMD observed (p < 0.001). Regression analysis after grouping for treatment and time confirmed the strong negative association of the changes of plasma glucose and FMD and indicate that the effect of repaglinide observed is based on the reduction glycemia.

CONCLUSION

In subjects with IGT, the endothelial dysfunction observed after a glucose challenge is related to the extent of hyperglycemia. Reduction of hyperglycemia by repaglinide reduces endothelial dysfunction in a glucose dependent manner.