Alternate-day dosing of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors for cholesterol reduction

Intermittent Nondaily Dosing Strategies in Patients with Previous Statin-Induced Myopathy

OBJECTIVE

To review the safety and efficacy of alternative intermittent statin dosing regimens in patients with previous intolerance due to myopathy.

DATA SOURCES

Literature was accessed through MEDLINE (1946 -December 2012) and EMBASE (1966-December 2012) using relevant MeSH and Emtree search terms, including statins, HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors, simvastatin, atorvastatin, lovastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin, pitavastatin, rosuvastatin, myopathy, and myalgias. Web of Science (1955-December 2012) and the aforementioned databases were additionally searched using combinations of the following text words: statin intolerance, alternate dosing, nondaily dosing, weekly dosing, statin-induced myopathy, and intermittent statin dosing. References of identified articles were reviewed for additional citations.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All identified English-language peer-reviewed publications were evaluated. Articles (excluding meeting abstracts) specifically addressing nondaily statin use in patients with previous statin-induced myopathy were reviewed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Although statins have achieved significant reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, as many as 10% of patients prescribed these therapies experience myopathies. Intermittent statin regimens ranging from every-other-day to once- weekly dosing have emerged in an attempt to maintain efficacy while moderating the incidence of adverse effects. The results reported in 10 publications investigating varying regimens with atorvastatin and/or rosuvastatin revealed that at least 70% of patients were able to tolerate an intermittent dosing strategy without a recurrence of previous treatment-limiting adverse effects. Although the degree of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol–lowering varied appreciably among studies (12–38%), the addition of a nondaily statin regimen facilitated attainment of National Cholesterol Education Program goals for some.

CONCLUSIONS

Although areas of uncertainty remain, intermittent dosing (particularly with rosuvastatin and atorvastatin) in previously intolerant patients is a useful strategy to capitalize on the benefits of this therapy. Larger scale randomized trials are necessary to more clearly define the role of this strategy and the optimal choice of regimen.

Efficacy and Safety of Rosuvastatin Every Other Day Compared with Once Daily in Patients with Hypercholesterolemia

Background:

Although most patients with hypercholesterolemia require life-long therapy with statins, these drugs are underused due to high costs. Every-other-day therapy could be one strategy to resolve this problem.

Objective:

To compare the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin 10 mg administered every other day versus once daily.

Methods:

An 8 week, randomized, open-label, parallel trial was conducted at the outpatient department of Phramongkutklao Hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. Eighty patients with primary hypercholesterolemia were equally randomized to receive rosuvastatin 10 mg once daily or every other day; 76 patients completed the study. Laboratory data were assessed at baseline and at the end of the study.

Results:

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels were reduced by 48% and 39% in the once-daily and every-other-day groups, respectively (p = 0.011). The percentage of patients who achieved LDL-C goals according to National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines was not significantly different between the once-daily (85%) and every-other-day (70%) groups (p = 0.180). In addition, both regimens were well tolerated, with no patient developing an elevation of more than 3 times baseline levels of aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase or 10 times that of creatine kinase. As expected, the monthly cost per percent LDL-C reduction of the once-daily ($0.72) regimen was about 38% higher than that of the every-other-day ($0.44) regimen.

Conclusions:

Every-other-day dosing of rosuvastatin may be an alternative regimen for cost savings, without a major decrease in therapeutic benefit or increase in adverse events, in patients with hypercholesterolemia. The number of patients achieving their LDL-C goal using the every-other-day regimen is comparable with the number using the once-daily regimen, especially in the low-risk patient category.

Alternate-day dosing with statins

The duration of the cholesterol-lowering effect of statins is considerably longer than the duration of the pharmacokinetic half-life of these drugs. The long duration of pharmacologic effects provides the rational for the efficacy of intermittent dosing that provides nearly the equivalent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction compared with daily dosing. Review of studies comparing alternate-day dosing with daily dosing of statins indicates that the magnitude of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction with alternate-day dosing is nearly the same, with obvious cost savings. It is possible that the adverse effects of statins, such as myalgia or diabetes, may be related to the cumulative amount of drug ingested over time, and if so, the adverse effects may be decreased by alternate-day dosing.

Rosuvastatin: Extended-Interval Dosing

This Hospital Pharmacy feature is extracted from Off-Label Drug Pacts, a quarterly publication available from Wolters Kluwer Health. Off-Label Drug Pacts is a practitioner-oriented resource for information about specific drug uses that are unapproved by the US Food and Drug Administration. This new guide to the literature enables the health care professional or clinician to quickly identify published studies on off-label uses and determine if a specific use is rational in a patient care scenario. References direct the reader to the full literature for more comprehensive information before patient care decisions are made. Direct questions or comments regarding Off-Label Drug Uses to jgeneral@kumc.edu .

Atorvastatin: Extended-Interval Dosing

This Hospital Pharmacy feature is extracted from Off-Label Drug Facts, a quarterly publication available from Wolters Kluwer Health. Off-Label Drug Facts is a practitioner-oriented resource for information about specific drug uses that are unapproved by the US Food and Drug Administration. This new guide to the literature enables the health care professional or clinician to quickly identify published studies on off-label uses and determine if a specific use is rational in a patient care scenario. References direct the reader to the full literature for more comprehensive information before patient care decisions are made. Direct questions or comments regarding Off-Label Drug Uses to jgeneral@kumc.edu .

A competing risks prescription refill model of compliance and persistence

OBJECTIVES

There is evidence to suggest that noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors have differing risk factors, clinical consequences, and responses to intervention. This has led to calls for these behaviors to be defined and measured separately to characterize medication-taking behavior comprehensively. Current prescription refill models of compliance are, however, unable to appropriately distinguish between noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors. To address this limitation, a prescription refill model of medication-taking behavior in which noncompliance and nonpersistence are treated as competing risks is presented.

METHODS

The proposed competing risks model of compliance and persistence is compared with a selection of widely applied prescription refill models of compliance and persistence using a common cohort of patients prescribed statin therapy.

RESULTS

The competing risks model allows the simultaneous measurement of noncompliance and nonpersistence, the partitioning of their individual contributions to medication-taking behavior, and the estimation of noncompliance risk for patients with varying treatment persistence. The results from this model provide information about the relative and overall contributions of noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors to medication-taking behavior. The methodology also allows an assessment of the differential influence of various risk factors on these behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed competing risks model differentiates between noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors using prescription refill data. Results from the model provide insights into the dynamics of noncompliant and nonpersistent behaviors that have not been possible with current prescription refill methodologies.

Alternate-Day Statin Therapy for the Treatment of Hyperlipidemia

Objective:

To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost of alternate-day statin therapy in the treatment of hyperlipidemia.

Data Sources:

Systematic searches were conducted for primary literature sources involving alternative statin regimens using PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (January 1966-March 2010). Articles selected were limited to those published in the English language. Reference citations from relevant publications identified were also reviewed.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

All English-language articles identified were reviewed and 17 trials (14 prospective and 3 retrospective) involving alternate-day statin dosing were included. Studies involving alternative statin dosing regimens other than alternating days were excluded from this review.

Data Synthesis:

Daily administration of statins is the standard of therapy used to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels as well as atherosclerosis that may lead to coronary events. Through LDL-C lowering and pleiotrope effects, statins decrease cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, due to cost and adverse effects of statins, some patients are nonadherent to statin therapy. Several small studies have found alternate-day statin therapy to be as effective at reducing LDL-C as daily administration, while also lowering the incidence of adverse reactions and potentially lowering cost.

Conclusions:

Alternate-day statin therapy may decrease cost and therapy-limiting adverse reactions while potentially increasing regimen adherence and positively affecting the lipid panel. Further research is needed to determine whether this alternative regimen produces similar cardiovascular outcomes as those with daily statin therapy,

Comparison of intermittent with continuous simvastatin treatment in hypercholesterolemic patients with end stage renal failure

Coronary artery disease is the most important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage renal failure (RF). Hypercholesterolemia is an important risk factor for coronary heart disease. Patients with chronic renal failure (CRF) have difficulties in compliance with their care and treatment. Intermittent simvastatin treatment may help to increase compliance and can be a treatment alternative in patients with CRF at risk of coronary artery disease. We investigated the effects of simvastatin and compared intermittent with continuous simvastatin treatment in hypercholesterolamic patients with CRF. The study group included 40 of 422 CRF patients on dialysis in our clinic. The inclusion criterion was low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of 130 mg/dL or more. Twenty patients received simvastatin 10 mg/day (continuous group) and 20 patients received simvastatin 20 mg three times a week (only dialysis days- intermittent group) for four months. Nineteen patients served as controls and they were given a prescribed diet only. Total cholesterol (TC) and LDL-C decreased markedly in patients receiving intermittent and continuous simvastatin compared to controls. Continuous simvastatin decreased TC by 23% (P < 0.001) and LDL-C by 39% (P < 0.001). Intermittent simvastatin decreased TC by 26% (P < 0.001) and LDL-C by 40% (P < 0.001). The atherogenic index ratios in both the continuous and intermittent groups (TC/High density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) and LDL-C/HDL-C) decreased significantly. There was no significant difference in patient compliance between the two groups. Intermittent simvastatin is as effective and reliable as continuous simvastatin treatment and can be an alternative treatment in hypercholesterolemic patients on dialysis.

Pharmacoeconomic impact of non-compliance with statins

There are numerous studies examining the pharmacoeconomic impact of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) therapy on healthcare costs and outcomes. A recently published review demonstrated that the cost-benefit of these agents depends primarily on the risk of developing a coronary event. That is, as the risk of a coronary event increases, the cost-effectiveness ratio decreases. The typical cost per life-year saved (LYS) ranged from USD 1800 to USD 40,000 in patients with pre-existing coronary artery disease (CAD) and from USD 15,000 to > USD 1 million per LYS in patients without pre-existing CAD. The literature is sparse on the pharmacoeconomics of medication non-compliance in patients taking statin medications. Data from two studies suggest that >75% compliance results in decreased coronary events such as myocardial infarction. However, retrospective database analyses indicate that the average compliance rate hovers around the 65% mark. Many of the studies discuss medication non-compliance as a factor, but do not independently analyse compliance pharmacoeconomically. We examined the pharmacoeconomic impact of non-compliance using published studies that contained pharmacoeconomic data and/or compliance data. In general, we used the placebo arm of these published studies as the surrogate marker for complete non-compliance. The results suggest that for almost 100% compliance versus initial non-compliance, the cost effectiveness of statin medications ranges from USD 4500 to over USD 250,000 per LYS depending on patient age, presence or absence of risk factors and whether the statin is being used for primary or secondary prevention. Alternate-day or weekly dosing studies were also used to examine the impact of compliance on cost and health outcomes. Alternate-day dosing represented 50% compliance and weekly dosing 29% compliance. Less than full compliance had the expected effect of worse health outcomes and lower drug costs. However, the studies were small and not designed as true pharmacoeconomic studies looking at the relationship between medication compliance and cost. The results of this review suggest that there needs to be further examination of the relationship between compliance with statins and cost effectiveness, and studies need to include compliance in their data collection and analysis.

Lovastatin: Extended-Interval (Alternate-Day) Dosing

Off-Label Drug Uses

This Hospital Pharmacy feature is extracted from Off-Label DrugFacts, a quarterly publication available from Facts and Comparisons. Off-Label DrugFacts is a practitioner-oriented resource for information about specific FDA-unapproved drug uses. This new guide to the literature will enable the health care professional/clinician to quickly identify published studies on off-label uses and to determine if a specific use is rational in a patient care scenario. The most relevant data are provided in tabular form so that the reader can easily identify the scope of information available. A summary of the data—including, background, study design, patient population, dosage information, therapy duration, results, safety, and therapeutic considerations—precedes each table of published studies. references direct the reader to the full literature for more comprehensive information prior to patient care decisions. Direct questions or comments on “Off-Label Drug Uses” to hospitalpharmacy@drugfacts.com .