Combination therapy with ezetimibe and simvastatin to achieve aggressive LDL reduction

Comparing Simvastatin Monotherapy V/S Simvastatin-Ezetimibe Combination Therapy for the Treatment of Hyperlipidemia: A Meta-Analysis and Review

Longstanding hyperlipidemia can increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. Statins are currently the mainstay of treatment in hyperlipidemia. Combination therapy of statin with ezetimibe is only indicated for severe hypercholesterolemia and very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) population. There is a paucity of studies comparing statin monotherapy vs combination therapy with ezetimibe. This study aims to perform a meta-analysis of the existing literature and compare the effectiveness of statin monotherapy with statin-ezetimibe combination therapy in the management of hyperlipidemia. A systematic electronic search of the scientific literature was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus. Only randomized controlled trials comparing simvastatin monotherapy vs simvastatin-ezetimibe combination therapy between the years 2000 and 2021 and published in English language were included. Fifteen studies were included in the final analysis. The main outcomes that were compared were a reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL). Our study showed that combination therapy led to a higher reduction of LDL-C (Mean difference: -20.22(-26.38, -14.07); P<0.0001) compared to monotherapy with a statin alone. There was no significant difference in the reduction of HDL-C values (Mean difference: -0.07(-0.45,0.32); P-0.04) between the two groups. Our study indicates that the combination therapy of simvastatin and ezetimibe is more effective in reduction of LDL-C levels compared to simvastatin monotherapy alone. Currently, guidelines recommend combination therapy only for severe hypercholesterolemia and high-risk ASCVD patients, more studies are needed to study the effectiveness of simvastatin-ezetimibe combination therapy in low-risk ASCVD population.

Berberine Promotes OATP1B1 Expression and Rosuvastatin Uptake by Inducing Nuclear Translocation of FXR and LXRα

Berberine, a quinoline alkaloid, can be used in combination with statins to enhance hypolipidemic effects and reduce the dose and side effects of statins. The hypolipidemic effects of statins in the liver are mainly regulated by organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATPs), and the expression of OATPs is regulated by nuclear receptors. Berberine has been reported to affect nuclear receptors. However, whether berberine affects the uptake of statins by regulating nuclear receptor-mediated expression of OATPs remains to be determined. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of berberine on the expression of OATP1B1 in HepG2 and explore the underlying mechanism. In HepG2 cells, 10-50 μM berberine significantly increased the uptake of rosuvastatin by inducing the expression of OATP1B1 mRNA and protein. Dual-Luciferase reporter assay showed that luciferase activity of hFXR and hLXRα activated OATP1B1 promoter was increased by 2.5-50 μM berberine in a concentration-dependent manner, with half-maximal effective concentration (EC₅₀) of 12.19 ± 0.86 and 32.15 ± 2.32 μM, respectively. In addition, after silencing FXR or LXRα by small interfering RNA (siRNA), berberine-induced OATP1B1 expression was significantly attenuated. Western blot analysis of FXR and LXRα protein levels in the cytoplasm and nucleus of HepG2 cells after treatment with berberine showed that berberine induced nuclear translocation and activation of FXR and LXRα. In conclusion, berberine-induced nuclear translocation of FXR and LXRα could activate OATP1B1 promoter, resulting in enhanced expression of OATP1B1 and increased uptake of rosuvastatin.

Ezetimibe prescriptions in older Canadian adults after an acute myocardial infarction: a population-based cohort study

Background

The utility of ezetimibe in preventing cardiovascular outcomes remains controversial. To guide future assessments of the effectiveness of ezetimibe in routine care, we evaluated how this medication has been prescribed to high-risk older adults in Ontario, Canada.

Methods

Using linked healthcare databases, we carried out a population-based cohort study of older adults who were discharged from hospital following an acute myocardial infarction from 2005 until 2014. We ascertained the rate of ezetimibe initiation within 6 months of their discharge. We also examined the characteristics of new ezetimibe prescriptions, as well as the predictors for receiving the therapy.

Results

Seventy one thousand one hundred twenty five older adults were hospitalized for an acute myocardial infarction between 2005 and 2014 (mean age 78.36 ± 7.71 years, 45.8% women). Only 1230 (1.7%) patients were newly prescribed ezetimibe within 6 months of their hospital discharge. The median duration of continuous use of ezetimibe was 1.2 years (IQR 0.3–3.5 years). Ezetimibe was prescribed more often to patients living in rural areas, with a history of coronary artery disease, on high-potency statins, and, with evidence of healthcare follow-up after hospital discharge. Prescriptions were less common in men, older patients, those living in long-term care facilities, those with a history of congestive heart failure, and those who were hospitalized for a myocardial infarction in more recent years.

Conclusions

Real-world drug effectiveness studies can help to complement the findings of randomized controlled trials. In our region however, only a small proportion of high-risk older adults received a prescription for ezetimibe following a myocardial infarction. Clinical and research implications are discussed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12944-017-0649-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Determining When to Add Nonstatin Therapy: A Quantitative Approach

BACKGROUND

Costs and uncertainty about the benefits of nonstatin therapies limit their use.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to identify patients who might benefit from the addition of a nonstatin to background statin therapy.

METHODS

We performed systematic reviews of subgroup analyses from randomized trials and observational studies with statin-treated participants to determine estimated 10-year absolute risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and to define high-risk and very high-risk patients. We used the relative risk reductions for the addition of a nonstatin to lower low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) used to determine the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent 1 ASCVD event over 5 years for each patient group and to allow comparisons with 5-year cost analyses.

RESULTS

The 10-year ASCVD risk is at least 30% (very high risk) for statin-treated participants with clinical ASCVD and comorbidities, and 20% to 29% (high risk) for those with ASCVD without comorbidities or who have heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. Adding ezetimibe to reduce low-density LDL-C by 20% would provide a 5-year NNT ≤50 for very high-risk patients with LDL-C ≥130 mg/dl or for high-risk patients with LDL-C ≥190 mg/dl, and an NNT ≤30 for very high-risk patients with LDL-C ≥160 mg/dl. Adding a PCSK9 monoclonal antibody to lower LDL-C by at least 50% would provide an NNT ≤50 for very high-risk and high-risk patients with LDL-C ≥70 mg/dl, and an NNT ≤30 for very high-risk and high-risk patients with an LDL-C ≥130 mg/dl.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding ezetimibe or PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies to maximally tolerated statin therapy may be cost effective in very high-risk and high-risk patients, depending on baseline LDL-C levels.

The future of lipid guidelines

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Factors influencing guideline development may result in paradigm shifts in treatment recommendations.

RECENT FINDINGS

The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guideline provides an example of how new methodology and findings from randomized clinical trials can result in a paradigm shift in the approach to cardiovascular prevention. This guideline moved away from a treat to cholesterol goal approach. Based on strong evidence of a net benefit in randomized clinical trials, statins were recommended to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in four groups of patients most likely to benefit. In addition, improved risk prediction equations and shared decision-making were recommended for guiding statin initiation in primary prevention patients with LDL cholesterol ≤190 mg/dl. Future guidelines will address the role of nonstatins for cardiovascular prevention. Improved risk prediction in statin-treated patients with and without cardiovascular disease, estimation of the potential for net benefit, and shared decision-making should be integral components of the next guideline.

SUMMARY

Guidelines will continue to evolve as new data accumulate. New treatment paradigms will be needed to optimize patient outcomes.

The safety of ezetimibe and simvastatin combination for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia

INTRODUCTION

In the light of the most recent and stricter dyslipidemia treatment guidelines, the need for combination hypolipidemic therapy is increasing. Ezetimibe plus simvastatin is available as a fixed dose therapy offering an efficient hypolipidemic treatment choice. Based on the positive results of the IMProved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT) trial, the use of this drug combination is expected to increase in the next years.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the current evidence regarding the safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin combination. Current evidence regarding possible associated side effects (musculoskeletal, gastrointestinal, endocrine, hematological, renal, ophthalmologic, allergic, malignancy) and drug interactions of this combination is thoroughly discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Ezetimibe and simvastatin treatment, either as a single pill or the combined use of the individual compounds, offers limited additional risk compared with simvastatin monotherapy and comprises a safe and efficient choice for dyslipidemia treatment in high-risk and diabetic patients.

Geographic variation in statin use for complex acute myocardial infarction patients: evidence of effective care?

BACKGROUND

Despite strong evidence to designate statin use for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) as "effective care," observational studies show that many patients with CVD do not receive statins. This suggests that statin prescribing decisions for complex CVD patients are preference sensitive.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate local area variation in statin prescribing for subsets of complex patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) to assess whether current statin prescribing patterns fit profiles of either "effective care" or "preference-sensitive care."

RESEARCH DESIGN AND SUBJECTS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 124,618 Medicare patients with fee-for-service parts A, B, and D benefits who were hospitalized with AMI in 2008 or 2009 with no evidence of AMI in the past 12 months.

MEASURES

Patient complexity was defined by the presence of diabetes, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease in the year before AMI admission. Local area practice styles for "no statin," "lower-intensity statins," and "high-intensity statins" were measured using the driving area for clinical care method. Statin prescribing rates for complex patient subsets were contrasted across patients grouped by local areas practice styles.

RESULTS

Lower statin treatment rates were observed for patients with complex conditions, especially among those with heart failure. However, substantial local area variation in statin prescribing is observed across all complex patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite guidelines promoting the use of statins for secondary prevention for CVD patients, substantial local area variation suggests that patient and provider beliefs and preferences weigh heavily in statin prescribing decisions.

Hypercholesterolemia and microvascular dysfunction: interventional strategies

Hypercholesterolemia is defined as excessively high plasma cholesterol levels, and is a strong risk factor for many negative cardiovascular events. Total cholesterol levels above 200 mg/dl have repeatedly been correlated as an independent risk factor for development of peripheral vascular (PVD) and coronary artery disease (CAD), and considerable attention has been directed toward evaluating mechanisms by which hypercholesterolemia may impact vascular outcomes; these include both results of direct cholesterol lowering therapies and alternative interventions for improving vascular function. With specific relevance to the microcirculation, it has been clearly demonstrated that evolution of hypercholesterolemia is associated with endothelial cell dysfunction, a near-complete abrogation in vascular nitric oxide bioavailability, elevated oxidant stress, and the creation of a strongly pro-inflammatory condition; symptoms which can culminate in profound impairments/alterations to vascular reactivity. Effective interventional treatments can be challenging as certain genetic risk factors simply cannot be ignored. However, some hypercholesterolemia treatment options that have become widely used, including pharmaceutical therapies which can decrease circulating cholesterol by preventing either its formation in the liver or its absorption in the intestine, also have pleiotropic effects with can directly improve peripheral vascular outcomes. While physical activity is known to decrease PVD/CAD risk factors, including obesity, psychological stress, impaired glycemic control, and hypertension, this will also increase circulating levels of high density lipoprotein and improving both cardiac and vascular function. This review will provide an overview of the mechanistic consequences of the predominant pharmaceutical interventions and chronic exercise to treat hypercholesterolemia through their impacts on chronic sub-acute inflammation, oxidative stress, and microvascular structure/function relationships.

Management of complex lipid abnormalities with a fixed dose combination of simvastatin and extended release niacin

ER niacin combined with simvastatin provides an additional option for achieving LDL-C and non-HDL-C goals for cardiovascular prevention, with greater efficacy in those with triglyceride levels >200 mg/dL. ER niacin 1000 mg combined with simvastatin 20 mg reduced LDL-C by 6%, non-HDL-C by 7%, and triglycerides by 13%, and raised HDL-C by 11% compared to simvastatin 20 mg alone. The 2000 mg dose combined with simvastatin 20 to 40 mg raised reduced LDL-C by 7% to 24%, non-HDL-C by 16% to 28%, and triglycerides by 23% to 34%, and increased HDL-C by 18% to 22% compared to similar dose simvastatin therapy. While cardiovascular risk is reduced in proportion to the magnitude of LDL-C lowering, the additive benefit of raising HDL-C and lowering triglycerides remains to be determined. ER niacin-simvastatin is reasonably well tolerated, with a <7% discontinuation rate due to flushing in patients who used aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications as needed. However, drop-out rates were high in both the simvastatin and ER niacin-simvastatin treatment groups in both the 24- and 52-week studies. The safety profile of the combination appears to be similar to that of niacin and simvastatin used as monotherapies. Results of ongoing morbidity/mortality trials of ER niacin added to statin therapy are eagerly awaited.

Fixed-dose combination of extended-release niacin plus simvastatin for lipid disorders

Coronary heart disease (CHD) carries significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Elevated LDL-cholesterol and reduced HDL-cholesterol levels are well-recognized CHD risk factors. Despite guideline recommendations for intensive therapy among patients at high risk for CHD to lower LDL-cholesterol, such lowering has failed to prevent approximately two-thirds of cardiovascular events. As a result of new data, guidelines have begun to focus on non-HDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides as treatment targets, with the end result being a recommendation for combination therapy, such as niacin plus statin for the treatment of dyslipidemia. Compared with statin monotherapy, a combination of niacin and statin therapy provides beneficial effects on a broad range of lipid particles and some evidence suggests a further reduction in CHD risk. Recent studies have shown that the combination of a fixed dose of extended-release niacin plus simvastatin reduces non-HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, triglycerides and total cholesterol:HDL-cholesterol ratio by approximately 50% while increasing HDL-cholesterol by 25%. The safety of this combination is consistent with the safety profiles of each individual component and is well tolerated. A long-term study is currently being conducted to evaluate whether this combination therapy confers an additive impact on clinical end points.

Perspectives on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal achievement

BACKGROUND

Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). European and US guidelines now recommend lower LDL-C levels, particularly in high-risk patients. Although LDL-C treatment goals to reduce the risk of CHD are clear, many patients do not reach their LDL-C goals.

OBJECTIVES

Examine consensus guideline targets for LDL-C lowering in patients at high or very high cardiovascular risk; examine cholesterol goal achievement in clinical practice; evaluate the effectiveness of ezetimibe/statin and other adjunctive lipid-lowering treatments in achieving LDL-C goals; and consider ongoing controversies and the randomized controlled trials that may help to resolve or better illuminate them.

METHODS

An English-language PubMed search was conducted to identify prospective randomized controlled trials, open-label studies, and retrospective and observational studies from 2001 (same year that the executive summary of the National Cholesterol Education Program's Adult Treatment Panel III was published) to present for an analysis of the effects of adjunctive therapies on LDL-C lowering and goal attainment in patients at elevated cardiovascular risk.

RESULTS

Elevated LDL-C is the primary target of lipid-lowering therapy; aggressive lowering is of great benefit to those at high risk. Statins are recommended first-line lipid-lowering agents, with a long, well-regarded history of efficacy and safety. Not all patients, however, can achieve recommended LDL-C goals simply using starting doses of statins. For such patients, more intensive therapy utilizing high-dose statins or combination therapy, including statins combined with other lipid-lowering agents, such as ezetimibe, bile acid resins (BARs), or niacin, is warranted. Potential limitations of the present review include possible publication bias and the focus on pharmacotherapy rather than lifestyle modification and the important objective of multiple risk-factor modification to reduce absolute global cardiovascular risk.

CONCLUSIONS

With a well-established link between elevated LDL-C and cardiovascular risk, aggressive LDL-C lowering becomes particularly important. Patients needing intensive LDL-C lowering to achieve goals will often require adjunctive treatments, including ezetimibe, BARs, or niacin along with statins. Given both their high mg: mg potency in lowering LDL-C and favorable tolerability and patient acceptance/adherence profile, ezetimibe/statin combination regimens arguably provide the greatest likelihood for patients to reach new, lower LDL-C targets; however, efficacy and safety data of any adjunctive treatment, along with drug costs and patient adherence to treatment (partly related to complexity of the regimen) all need to be considered when determining the optimal regimen to achieve LDL-C goals in individual patients according to their baseline absolute cardiovascular risk, LDL-C level, and consensus LDL-C targets.

Long-term safety and efficacy of a combination of niacin extended release and simvastatin in patients with dyslipidemia: the OCEANS study

INTRODUCTION

High-dose HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) fail to prevent approximately two-thirds of cardiovascular events. This fact has focused increased attention on treating abnormalities of non-high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (non-HDL-C), HDL-C, and triglycerides in national guidelines and has intensified interest in combination therapy.

METHODS

The OCEANS study (Open-label evaluation of the safety and efficacy of a Combination of niacin ER and simvAstatin in patieNts with dySlipidemia; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00080275) evaluated the safety and efficacy of a combination of niacin extended release and simvastatin (NER/S; SIMCOR) over 52 weeks in 520 patients with mixed dyslipidemia. After a >or=4-week run-in phase of diet modification and simvastatin 40 mg/day, median baseline values (mg/dL) were: non-HDL-C = 141, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) = 110, HDL-C = 45, and triglyceride = 151. Patients were randomized to an 8- or 12-week niacin titration scheme to a maximum NER/S dosage of 2,000/40 mg/day.

RESULTS

Differences between titration groups in tolerability, safety, and efficacy were minimal; therefore, all results are for pooled titration groups. The safety of NER/S was consistent with the safety profile of each individual component. Treatment with NER/S was well tolerated: 71% of patients experienced flushing and 92% of flushing episodes were mild or moderate in intensity. Overall, 61% of patients experienced flushing episodes that were rated as mild or moderate in intensity. Flushing decreased over time: <40% of those who had flushing during titration experienced flushing during the final 12 weeks. A total of 20% of patients discontinued treatment because of a treatment-related adverse event, including 7% who discontinued because of flushing. Median changes from baseline (following the simvastatin 40 mg/day run-in phase) to 24 weeks were: non-HDL-C = -27.3%, LDL-C = -25.0%, HDL-C = +23.9%, and triglycerides = -35.9% (all p < 0.0001 vs baseline). In lipid-treatment-naive patients, NER/S 2,000/40 mg/day decreased non-HDL-C, LDL-C, and triglycerides by approximately 50% and increased HDL-C by approximately 25% when week-24 lipid values were compared with lipid values obtained prior to the simvastatin 40 mg/day run-in. All three therapeutic lipid targets (LDL-C [risk-adjusted goal], HDL-C >or=40 mg/dL, and triglycerides <150 mg/dL) were achieved concurrently by 65% of patients treated with NER/S.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with NER/S 2,000/40 mg/day is well tolerated, has no unanticipated adverse events, and provides additional, clinically relevant improvements in multiple lipid parameters beyond statin monotherapy.

Combination of simvastatin with berberine improves the lipid-lowering efficacy

We have identified berberine (BBR) as a novel cholesterol-lowering drug acting through stabilization of the low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) messenger RNA. Because the mechanism differs from that of statins, it is of great interest to examine the lipid-lowering activity of BBR in combination with statins. Our results showed that combination of BBR with simvastatin (SIMVA) increased the LDLR gene expression to a level significantly higher than that in monotherapies. In the treatment of food-induced hyperlipidemic rats, combination of BBR (90 mg/[kg d], oral) with SIMVA (6 mg/[kg d], oral) reduced serum LDL cholesterol by 46.2%, which was more effective than that of the SIMVA (28.3%) or BBR (26.8%) monotherapy (P < .01 for both) and similar to that of SIMVA at 12 mg/(kg d) (43.4%). More effective reduction of serum triglyceride was also achieved with the combination as compared with either monotherapy. Combination of BBR with SIMVA up-regulated the LDLR messenger RNA in rat livers to a level about 1.6-fold higher than the monotherapies did. Significant reduction of liver fat storage and improved liver histology were found after the combination therapy. The therapeutic efficacy of the combination was then evaluated in 63 hypercholesterolemic patients. As compared with monotherapies, the combination showed an improved lipid-lowering effect with 31.8% reduction of serum LDL cholesterol (P < .05 vs BBR alone, P < .01 vs SIMVA alone). Similar efficacies were observed in the reduction of total cholesterol as well as triglyceride in the patients. Our results display the rationale, effectiveness, and safety of the combination therapy for hyperlipidemia using BBR and SIMVA. It could be a new regimen for hypercholesterolemia.

Ezetimibe: cholesterol lowering and beyond

Ezetimibe is a cholesterol absorption inhibitor that blocks the intestinal absorption of both biliary and dietary cholesterol. It appears to exert its effect by blocking intestinal sterol transporters, specifically Niemann-Pick C1-like 1 proteins, thereby inhibiting the intestinal absorption of cholesterol, phytosterols and certain oxysterols. Ezetimibe monotherapy and in combination with statin therapy is primarily indicated for lowering LDL-cholesterol levels. In addition, it may favorably affect other parameters that could potentially further reduce atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk, such as raising HDL-cholesterol and lowering levels of triglycerides, non-HDL-cholesterol, apolipoprotein B and remnant-like particle cholesterol. Further effects of ezetimibe include a reduction in circulating phytosterols and oxysterols and, when used in combination with statins, a reduction in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. The clinical significance of the LDL-cholesterol lowering and other effects of ezetimibe is being evaluated in clinical outcome studies.

Models for describing relations among the various statin drugs, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering, pleiotropic effects, and cardiovascular risk

Five models are proposed to describe the relations among statins, pleiotropic effects, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol lowering, and cardiovascular risk reduction. On the basis of the evidence available, the pleiotropic effects of statins do not appear to reduce cardiovascular risk more than would be predicted from LDL cholesterol lowering alone, which suggests that model 1 is not a valid model. Although most attention has focused on models 2 through 4, most data to date support model 3 for describing the relation between statins, inflammation, and cardiovascular risk. Stronger consideration should also be given to model 5, in which pleiotropic effects are the result of cardiovascular risk reduction in and of itself. It may be that other models are operative for nonatherosclerotic inflammatory disorders. However, beneficial effects of statins on rheumatologic or other noncardiovascular may still be due to effects of cholesterol reduction on the immune system, as in model 3. More high-quality research is needed to determine the role of statin pleiotropic effects in cardiovascular risk reduction. Well-designed animal studies can help elucidate potential mechanisms, which will then require confirmation in human studies with cardiovascular event outcomes. Substudies of cardiovascular end point trials and mechanistic studies should be methodologically sound and designed to test specific models. To sort out the independence of pleiotropic effects from LDL cholesterol lowering, studies will need to achieve similar LDL cholesterol reductions in each treatment group. It may be that the biologic impact of a specific pleiotropic effect is mediated by >1 model. Ultimately, once a predominant model has been identified for a given pleiotropic effect, long-term studies would be needed to evaluate the relative contributions of various pleiotropic effects to cardiovascular risk reduction. These findings may reveal new targets for the development of new agents that will prove effective for reducing cardiovascular events when added to LDL cholesterol lowering. To date, little evidence supports consideration of statin pleiotropic effects in clinical decision making. In conclusion, LDL cholesterol is currently the only reliable marker for statin effects on cardiovascular risk reduction. The focus should remain on closing the treatment gap and improving adherence to therapies directed at lowering LDL cholesterol and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease.

Prolonged-release nicotinic acid for the management of dyslipidemia: an update including results from the NAUTILUS study

Low HDL-cholesterol (<1.02 mmol/L [40 mg/dL] in men or <1.29 mmol/L [50 mg/dL] in women) occurs in about one-third of European patients with dyslipidemia and is an independent cardiovascular risk factor. Simultaneous correction of low HDL-cholesterol and high total-cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol may provide reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality beyond those possible with statins alone. Nicotinic acid (niacin in the US) is the most effective means of increasing HDL-cholesterol available and has been shown to reduce cardiovascular event rates significantly. Niaspan^® (prolonged-release nicotinic acid) provides a convenient, once-daily means of administering nicotinic acid. Clinical studies with Niaspan^® have demonstrated marked, long-term increases in HDL-cholesterol with additional useful benefits on triglycerides, LDL-cholesterol, and lipid sub-profiles. The NAUTILUS study demonstrated the beneficial efficacy and tolerability profiles of Niaspan^® in a usual-care setting. The most common side-effect of Niaspan^® is flushing, which infrequently causes treatment discontinuation and which usually subsides over continued treatment. The ARBITER 2 and ARBITER 3 studies showed 1–2 years of treatment with Niaspan^® plus a statin induced regression of atherosclerosis in patients with coronary artery disease. The effect of Niaspan^®-statin treatment, relative to a statin alone, on clinical cardiovascular outcomes is currently under evaluation. Niaspan^® represents a practical means of correcting low HDL-cholesterol, an independent risk factor for adverse cardiovascular outcomes.

Achieving Vascular Risk Factor Targets: A Survey of a London General Practice

We assessed lipid goal achievement in patients at high risk for vascular events from a general practice (London, United Kingdom). Patients were identified as those with a prescription for hypolipidaemic medication, a significant (>20%) Framingham risk, and from the myocardial infarction register. Two hundred forty-five patients were currently taking a statin (average dose, 23.1 mg/day). Cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein—cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein—cholesterol, and triglycerides changed significantly following statin treatment. Of 285 patients who had taken statins at some time point, 11 (3.9%) were intolerant, 5 of which subsequently tolerated another statin. Approximately 10.1% of patients discontinued statin treatment for unclear reasons. Only 64 patients (29.1% of 220) reached the Joint British Societies' Guidelines on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease target of a total cholesterol of <4.0 mmol/L; 50 patients (38.8% of 129) reached the low-density lipoprotein—cholesterol target of <2.0 mmol/L. This value of low-density lipoprotein—cholesterol is similar to that recommended by the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology. With regard to the General Medical Services guidelines target for total cholesterol, 162 (73.6% of 220) patients reached ≤5.0 mmol/L. The group that best achieved target cholesterol (Joint British Societies' Guidelines and General Medical Services) were those with comorbidities. In conclusion, while reaching General Medical Services targets was satisfactory, the percentage of patients reaching Joint British Societies' Guidelines targets was not. This discrepancy may reflect the presence of multiple guidelines. The current stricter lipid targets are difficult to achieve; possible methods that may be used to improve lipids further could involve using combination therapy, statin dose titration, and better education.

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and ezetimibe plus statin therapy in patients aged under 65, 65–74 and 75 years and older

Although the greatest burden of cardiovascular disease occurs after age 65 years, limited efficacy and safety data are available for cholesterol-lowering drugs in elderly patients. We undertook a pooled analysis of individual data from 13,282 patients aged 18–93 years in 16 published trials of ezetimibe and ezetimibe added on to or coadministered with a statin (ezetimibe/statin). Overall, ezetimibe reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 20% compared with placebo and ezetimibe/statin reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 17% compared with a statin alone, with consistent treatment effects across age groups (<65, 65–74 and ≥75 years). Rates of any adverse or drug-related adverse events were also similar across age groups. We conclude that the lipid efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and ezetimibe/statin in those aged 65–74 and 75 years and older are similar to those observed in patients aged under 65 years.

Ezetimibe in Heart Transplantation: Initial Experience

Dyslipidemia is a common problem among heart transplant (HT) recipients; it is a frequent risk factor in these patients that is exacerbated by immunosuppressive drugs. Statins are effective drugs to treat dyslipidemia in HT recipients, but control is suboptimal in some patients. Ezetimibe acts through inhibition of the enterohepatic recirculation, a mechanism different from but complementary to statins. Our objective was to assess the effect of the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy among a population of HT patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included 19 stable patients on statin therapy with suboptimal control of cholesterol. Determinations were performed at baseline on statins and at 6 months (statins + ezetimibe). The analyzed variables were total cholesterol and fractions, triglycerides, cyclosporine levels, CPK, SGOT/SGPT, and bilirubin. The statistics were Student's t test for paired samples.

RESULTS

The overall mean age was 59 +/- 9 years with 95% males and mean BMI 27.5 +/- 3.5. The time since HT was 7 +/- 3 years. The reason for HT included ischemic heart disease in 68%. Pre-HT risk factors included in arterial hypertension in 32% and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in 10%, Dyslipidemia occurred in 68%; hypertriglyceridemia in 16% and hyperuricemia in 21%. Immunosuppression was cyclosporine in 100% and steroids in 94%. Type of lipid-lowering agent was simvastatin in 5%; pravastatin, 32%; atorvastatin, 58%; fibrates, 10%. The ezetimibe dose was 10 mg/day in 95% of cases. When ezetimibe was added we observed differences in total cholesterol values (total cholesterol at baseline: 279 +/- 74, total cholesterol with ezetimibe: 198 +/- 47 mg/dL; P = .0001) and LDL-cholesterol values (LDL-cholesterol at baseline: 171 +/- 69, LDL-cholesterol with ezetimibe: 109 +/- 41 mg/dL; P = .001). The remaining variables did not show significant differences.

CONCLUSION

The addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy among heart transplant patients was effective to control dyslipidemia and showed an excellent safety profile.

Simvastatin: present and future perspectives

Simvastatin is lipophilic statin with a short half-life that is primarily metabolized by CYP450 3A4. At doses of 5 - 80 mg, simvastatin lowers LDL cholesterol by 25 - 50%. Simvastatin has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease by 35% and overall mortality by up to 30% over 5 years. The recommended starting dose of simvastatin 40 mg is approved as a lipid-lowering agent and for all high-risk patients, including those with cardiovascular disease and diabetes, regardless of the baseline LDL level. Simvastatin dose should be adjusted in those receiving CYP3A4 inhibitors, gemfibrozil, or ciclosporin, amiodarone, or in those with severe renal insufficiency. Coformulation of simvastatin with ezetimibe is now available, and coformulation with extended release niacin is under development.

The effect of simvastatin, ezetimibe and their combination on the lipid profile, arterial stiffness and inflammatory markers

OBJECTIVE

Arterial stiffness and highly sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP) serum level predict the risk for cardiovascular events. The most commonly used drugs for lowering cholesterol levels, the statins, also have anti-inflammatory effects and can decrease arterial stiffness. Ezetimibe is the first drug of a new class of cholesterol absorption inhibitors in common use and, to date, its effect on arterial stiffness has not yet been studied. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of simvastatin and ezetimibe, both singly and in combination, on arterial stiffness and hsCRP serum concentration in hypercholesterolemic patients.

METHODS

Forty hypercholesterolemic patients were studied. Group1 comprised previously untreated patients, who received simvastatin at doses of 40 mg/day during the study; group 2 comprised patients previously treated with simvastatin at 40 mg/day, who received simvastatin at 80 mg/day during the study; group 3 consisted of patients previously untreated, who received ezetimibe at doses of 10 mg/day during the study; group 4 comprised patients previously treated with simvastatin at 40 mg/day, who received simvastatin at 40 mg/day and ezetimibe at 10 mg/day during the study. Arterial stiffness expressed as the Augmentation Index (AIx) (assessed by pulse wave analysis), the lipid profile and the hsCRP level were measured at baseline and after 3 months of treatment.

RESULTS

The reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) after treatment was significantly greater in groups 1 and 4 (39.9 and 35.7%) than in groups 2 and 3 (17.7 and 16.9%; p = 0.005). The AIx decreased significantly only in group 1 patients, from 30.2 +/- 8.3% before treatment to 21.6 +/- 6.5% after treatment (p < 0.001). Changes in hsCRP paralleled the changes in AIx, with a significant decrease in patients in group 1 only, from 2.8 +/- 2.5 mg/L before treatment to 1.6 +/- 1.5 mg/L after treatment (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Ezetimibe as a monotherapy had no effect on arterial stiffness or hsCRP, while the administration of simvastatin at 40 mg per day improved arterial stiffness and CRP. However, increasing the dose of simvastatin or administering ezetimibe in combination with simvastatin had no beneficial effects on arterial stiffness.

Squalene synthase inhibition: A novel target for the management of dyslipidemia

A new class of compounds, known as squalene synthase inhibitors, has recently reached phase III clinical trials and may provide another therapeutic option for clinicians to improve risk management of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). The clinical need for another LDL-C-lowering therapy is evident by the inability to achieve an LDL-C target of less than 70 mg/dL in the majority of very high-risk patients on statin monotherapy. Human clinical trial data with TAK-475, a novel and potent inhibitor of squalene synthase, have not yet been published.