Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe co-administered with simvastatin in thiazolidinedione-treated type 2 diabetic patients

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.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Statin-Ezetimibe Combination Therapy with Statin Monotherapy in Patients with Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies

INTRODUCTION

Dyslipidemia in diabetes mellitus is characterized by hypertriglyceridemia, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Additionally, the potentially increased risk of morbidity and mortality following atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases should be considered in the treatment of dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of the published data to compare the effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin)-ezetimibe combination therapy and statin monotherapy on lipid and glucose parameters in patients with diabetes. We also compared safety based on the adverse events reported for the two groups.

RESULTS

In total, 17 articles were included in this meta-analysis. In the efficacy assessment, the combination treatment afforded a significantly greater reduction in LDL-C than did statin monotherapy (standard difference in means 0.691; 95% confidence interval 0.534-0.847). A significantly greater improvement effect was observed in the levels of HDL-C, total cholesterol, triglyceride, and apolipoprotein B, but not apolipoprotein A1, with combination therapy than with statin monotherapy. Additionally, combination therapy reduced fasting blood glucose levels more significantly than did statin monotherapy. In terms of safety, there were no significant differences in treatment-related adverse events between the two treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Statin-ezetimibe combination therapy enhances levels of LDL-C and other lipids without increasing the risk of adverse events compared with statin monotherapy. The present meta-analysis presents valid evidence for appropriate drug regimens to treat dyslipidemia in patients with diabetes.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Identifier Number CRD42021244578.

The efficacy and safety of statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with double-dose statin in patients with high cardiovascular risk: A meta-analysis

Currently, statins are the first-line therapies for dyslipidemia and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, however, their hypolipidemic effects have not been satisfactory. We performed a meta-analysis to compare lipid-lowering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and statin combination therapy with double-dose statin monotherapy in patients with high cardiovascular risk. Fourteen studies involving 3105 participants were included in the final analysis; 1558 (50.18%) participants received ezetimibe and statin combination therapy and 1547 (49.82%) received double-dose statin monotherapy. Eight studies reported the percentages of changes in several lipid parameters from baseline to endpoint in both groups. Lipid parameters changed more significantly in patients coadministered with ezetimibe and statin (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C]: MD = -9.39, 95% CI -13.36 to -5.42; non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [non-HDL-C]: MD = -10.36, 95% CI -14.23 to -6.50; total cholesterol [TC]: MD = -8.11, 95% CI -10.95 to -5.26; and triglyceride [TG]: MD = -5.96, 95% CI -9.12 to -2.80), with moderate to high heterogeneity among the studies. Two out of fourteen studies investigated several different statins. Our subgroup analysis showed that, compared with double-dose atorvastatin monotherapy, ezetimibe and atorvastatin combination therapy significantly decreased LDL-C, non-HDL-C, TC, and TG levels by 14.16%, 14.01%, 11.06%, and 5.96%, respectively (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the incidence of laboratory-related adverse events (AEs) between statin combination therapy and monotherapy. Overall, ezetimibe and statin combination therapy significantly decreased LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and TC levels in patients with high cardiovascular risk, among which ezetimibe combined with atorvastatin had the best therapeutic effect. Compared with ezetimibe and statin combination therapy, double-dose statin monotherapy did not increase the risk of AEs.

Ezetimibe-Statin Combination Therapy

BACKGROUND

To date, most clinical comparisons of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy versus statin monotherapy have relied entirely on surrogate variables. In this systematic review, we study the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe-statin combination therapy in comparison to statin monotherapy in terms of the prevention of cardiovascular events in hyperlipidemic patients with atherosclerosis and/or diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

This review is based on a systematic literature search (1995 to July 2015) in PubMed, the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), the Cochrane Library, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry.

RESULTS

Nine randomized, controlled trials with data from a total of 19 461 patients were included. Ezetimibe-statin combination therapy was associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events than statin monotherapy: 33% of the patients treated with ezetimibe and a statin, and 35% of those treated with a statin alone, had a cardiovascular event within seven years (number needed to treat [NNT]: 50 over 7 years). Combination therapy was also significantly more effective in preventing a composite endpoint consisting of death due to cardiovascular disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina pectoris, coronary revascularization, and nonfatal stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [0,89; 0,99]; p = 0.016). Diabetic patients benefited from combination therapy rather than monotherapy with respect to cardiovascular morbidity (HR 0.87 [0.78; 0.94]). On the other hand, the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy did not lessen either cardiovascular or overall mortality. Serious undesired events occurred in 38% of the patients taking ezetimibe and a statin nd in 39% of the patients taking a statin alone (relative risk 1.09 [0.77; 1.55]).

CONCLUSION

In high-risk patients with an acute coronary syndrome, combination therapy with ezetimibe and a statin lowered the risk of cardiovascular events in comparison to statin monotherapy. The risk of dying or suffering an adverse drug effect was similar in the two treatment groups.

A Novel Bongkrekic Acid Analog-Mediated Modulation of the Size of Lipid Droplets: Evidence for the Appearance of Smaller Adipocytes

Thiazolidinediones (TZDs) are known as peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ) activators, and are used in the treatment of diabetes. Although the usefulness of TZDs has been demonstrated, some of their side effects are becoming an obstacle to their clinical applicability; edema is known to be evoked by the "structural characteristics" of TZD, but not by the PPARγ activation. Thus, novel therapeutic modalities (i.e., non-TZD-type PPARγ activators) having different structures to those of TZDs are desired. We previously identified bongkrekic acid (BKA) as a PPARγ activator using the human breast cancer MCF-7 cell line as a model system. In the present study, we newly synthesized BKA analogs and examined the usefulness of BKA and its analogs as PPARγ activators in differentiated adipocyte cells. Among the chemicals investigated, one of the BKA analogs (BKA-#2) strongly stimulated PPARγ and the differentiation of 3T3-L1 cells similar to pioglitazone, a positive control. Furthermore, BKA-#2 reduced the size of lipid droplets in the mature adipocyte cells. The possible modulation mechanism by BKA-#2 is discussed.

Effect of Ezetimibe on LDL-C Lowering and Atherogenic Lipoprotein Profiles in Type 2 Diabetic Patients Poorly Controlled by Statins

Background

There exists a subpopulation of T2DM in whom first-line doses of statin are insufficient for optimally reducing LDL-C, representing a major risk of CVD. The RESEARCH study focuses on LDL-C reduction in this population along with modifications of the lipid profiles leading to residual risks.

Methods

Lipid changes were assessed in a randomized, multicenter, 12-week, open-label study comparing a high-potency statin (10mg of atorvastatin or 1mg of pitavastatin) plus ezetimibe (EAT: n = 53) with a double dose of statin (20mg of atorvastatin or 2mg of pitavastatin) (DST: n = 56) in DM subjects who had failed to achieve the optimal LDL-C targets. Lipid variables were compared with a primary focus on LDL-C and with secondary focuses on the percentage of patients who reached the LDL-C targets and changes in the levels of RLP-C (remnant like particle cholesterol) and sd-LDL-C, two characteristic atherogenic risks of DM.

Results

The reduction of LDL-C (%), the primary endpoint, differed significantly between the two groups (-24.6 in EAT vs. -10.9 in DST). In the analyses of the secondary endpoints, EAT treatment brought about significantly larger reductions in sd-LDL-C (-20.5 vs. -3.7) and RLP-C (-19.7 vs. +5.5). In total, 89.4% of the patients receiving EAT reached the optimized treatment goal compared to 51.0% of the patients receiving DST. The changes in TC (-16.3 vs. -6.3) and non-HDL-C (-20.7 vs. -8.3) differed significantly between the two groups.

Conclusion

Ezetimibe added to high-potency statin (10 mg of atorvastatin or 1 mg of pitavastatin) was more effective than the intensified-dose statin (20 mg of atorvastatin or 2 mg of pitavastatin) treatment not only in helping T2DM patients attain more LDL-C reduction, but also in improving their atherogenic lipid profiles, including their levels of sd-LDL-C and RLP-C.

We thus recommend the addition of ezetimibe to high-potency statin as a first line strategy for T2DM patients with insufficient statin response.

Trial Registration

The UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000002593

Inhibitory effect of atenolol on urinary excretion of metformin via down-regulating multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (rMate1) expression in the kidney of rats

Renal tubular secretion is an important pathway for the elimination of many clinically used drugs. Metformin, a commonly prescribed first-line antidiabetic drug, is secreted primarily by the renal tubule. Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving metformin may together be given selective β1 blockers (e.g., atenolol). Therefore, it is of great use to evaluate the effect of atenolol on metformin urinary excretion for exploring drug interactions and predicting the adverse effect of drugs. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of atenolol on the pharmacokinetic of metformin and plasma lactate (LCA) level in rats, for high LCA is a serious adverse reaction of metformin after long-term metformin treatment. In this study, rats were treated with metformin alone or in combination with atenolol. Plasma, urine and tissue concentration of metformin was determined by HPLC method, while Western blotting and immunohistochemical analysis were used to evaluate the renal expression of rat organic cation transporter 2 (rOct2) and multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (rMate1). The results showed that, after 7 days drug treatment, the AUC0 → t of metformin in atenolol and metformin co-administration group was significantly increased by 19.5% compared to that in metformin group, while the 24h cumulative urinary excretion of metformin was significantly decreased by 57.3%. In addition, atenolol treatment significantly decreased the renal expression of rMate1, but had no effect on rOct2 expression, renal blood perfusion and glomerular filtration. Moreover, plasma LCA level in atenolol and metformin co-administration group was significantly increased by 83.3% compared to that in metformin group after 60 days drug treatment. These results indicated that atenolol can inhibit urinary excretion of metformin via decreasing renal rMate1 expression, and long-term atenolol and metformin co-administration may induce potential lactic acidosis. Our results, for the first time, provided an important experimental evidence that rMate1 is the target of transporter-mediated drug interactions concerning metformin and atenolol.

Achieving goal lipid levels with ezetimibe plus statin add-on or switch therapy compared with doubling the statin dose. A pooled analysis

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the lipid-altering effects of ezetimibe added to ongoing statin therapy, statin titration, switching from statin monotherapy to a more potent statin or to ezetimibe/simvastatin.

METHODS

A pooled analysis of patient-level data from 17 double-blind, active or placebo-controlled studies of 8667 hypercholesterolemic adults randomized to ezetimibe 10 mg added to ongoing statins, statin titration (doubling), or switching from ongoing statins to rosuvastatin (10 mg) or to ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 and 40 mg). Percent change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was estimated by analysis of variance. Percent of patients who achieved LDL-C and other guideline-recommended targets, and target lipid levels by baseline distance to goal were evaluated.

RESULTS

LDL-C percent change from baseline was -26.0 for ezetimibe added to ongoing statin therapy, -27.6 for switching from ongoing statin to ezetimibe/simvastatin, -19.7 for switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg, and -9.7 for dose doubling of the ongoing statin. For patients within 0.8 mmol/L (30 mg/dL) of the target at baseline, LDL-C target attainment rates were 75.9% for adding ezetimibe to ongoing statin, 72.8% for switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin, 61.8% for switching to rosuvastatin, and 44.3% for statin dose-doubling. Similarly, improvements in other lipids and achievement of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B targets among this patient group were largest for ezetimibe added to ongoing statins and switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin; switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg and statin dose-doubling were less effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding ezetimibe to ongoing statin therapy appeared to be an effective option for patients who do not achieve lipid-lowering goals on statins alone.

Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is characterized by hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, and/or progressive loss of β-cell function. T2DM patients are at increased risk of micro- and macrovascular disease, and are often considered as representing an atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD) risk equivalent. Interventions directed at glucose and lipid level control in T2DM patients may reduce micro- and macrovascular disease. The optimal T2DM agent is one that lowers glucose levels with limited risk for hypoglycemia, and with no clinical trial evidence of worsening CHD risk. Lipid-altering drugs should preferably reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B (apo B) and have evidence that the mechanism of action reduces CHD risk. Statins reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apo B and have evidence of improving CHD outcomes, and are thus first-line therapy for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. In patients who do not achieve optimal lipid levels with statin therapy, or who are intolerant to statin therapy, add-on therapy or alternative therapies may be indicated. Additional available agents to treat hypercholesterolemic patients with T2DM include bile acid sequestrants, fibrates, niacin, and ezetimibe. This review discusses the use of these alternative agents to treat hypercholesterolemia in patients with T2DM, either as monotherapy or in combination with statin therapy.

Combination therapy with ezetimibe and simvastatin to achieve aggressive LDL reduction

A low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol goal of less than 100 mg/dl is recommended for patients at moderate to high risk of cardiovascular disease with an optional LDL goal of less than 70 mg/dl for patients at a very high risk of cardiovascular disease. Most patients will require reductions in LDL of more than 50% in order to achieve these more aggressive goals. Only a few agents will lower LDL by at least 50%. This review will focus on the efficacy and safety ezetimibe/simvastatin coadministered as a therapy with enhanced LDL-lowering efficacy, while minimizing the adverse effects of statins in a wide range of patients. Ezetimibe 10 mg/simvastatin 80 mg lowers LDL by approximately 60% and has been demonstrated to be superior to the highest doses of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin for lowering LDL and raising high-density lipoprotein.

Therapeutic options for lowering LDL-C in type 2 diabetes: a nurse practitioner's perspective

PURPOSE

The majority of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a key therapeutic target to reduce CVD risk. This article reviews therapeutic strategies that nurse practitioners (NPs) may use in the management of patients with T2DM requiring lipid management.

DATA SOURCES

The evidence used in developing this review included evidence-based reviews, clinical trials, guidelines, and consensus statements. Relevant publications were identified through a search of the literature using PubMed and other search engines.

CONCLUSIONS

Lowering LDL-C levels may reduce CVD risk, but achieving goals can be challenging. Lifestyle modifications (including diet, exercise, and smoking cessation) are key components of lipid management and reduction of CVD risk. Statins can be effective to reduce lipids. However, patients may not achieve lipid goals with monotherapy or may experience intolerable adverse effects. Alternative statins or statins along with other lipid-lowering agents remain good options.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Achieving LDL-C goals requires a comprehensive treatment plan that incorporates lifestyle and pharmacologic interventions. Patient commitment in setting goals and self-management is essential. NPs can play an important role in educating patients as well as prescribing appropriate treatments.

RESEARCH (Recognized effect of Statin and ezetimibe therapy for achieving LDL-C Goal), a randomized, doctor-oriented, multicenter trial to compare the effects of higher-dose statin versus ezetimibe-plus-statin on the serum LDL-C concentration of Japanese type-2 diabetes patients design and rationale

Aims

Hypercholesterolemia coexisting with diabetes still requires clinical intervention to manage the high risk of cardiovascular disease it poses. No second-step strategy is established, however, for cases where strong statins fail to bring cholesterol down to target levels. In this study we seek to demonstrate the superior effect of ezetimibe in combination with strong statins to reduce LDL-C in Japanese patients suffering from both T2DM and hyper LDL-cholesterolemia.

Methods

T2DM outpatients (109 patients from 16 institutes) who failed to achieve the target LDL-C value were recruited and randomly assigned to two groups, a double-dose-statin group and ezetimibe-plus-statin group. Follow-ups were scheduled at 0, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the percentage change in the level of LDL-C from baseline to 12 weeks.

Interim results

We could successfully create randomized (gender, age, LDL-C, HbA1c, etc.) two groups except for slight differences in apolipoprotein-B and sd-LDL.

Conclusions

RESEARCH is the first prospective, parallel-group, multicenter study comparing a double dose of strong statin with ezetimibe plus strong statin for T2DM patients. The RESEARCH study will provide reliable evidence with which to establish a clinical strategy for diabetics who fail to achieve the target LDL-C value.

Ezetimibe/simvastatin: a guide to its clinical use in hypercholesterolemia

Ezetimibe/simvastatin therapy combines two lipid-lowering compounds with complementary mechanisms of action, thereby blocking the two sources of plasma cholesterol and improving lipid profiles. Ezetimibe/simvastatin is an effective and generally well tolerated adjunct to dietary therapy for markedly reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and improving other lipid parameters across diverse patient populations. Dual treatment with ezetimibe/simvastatin is more effective than monotherapy with an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin), and the addition of ezetimibe to current statin therapy is more effective than doubling the statin dose.

Is combination therapy an effective way of reaching lipid goals in type 2 diabetes mellitus?

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with a specific pattern of plasma lipid and lipoprotein abnormalities. Lipid goals are often not attained with statins alone, and combination lipid-lowering strategies may need to be considered in an attempt to further reduce the residual cardiovascular risk. Combination therapy utilizes various classes of lipid-lowering medications with different mechanisms of action and different effects on lipid levels. Clinical trial data support the efficacy of combining statins with fibrates, niacin, ezetimibe (cholesterol absorption inhibitor) and colesevelam (bile acid sequestrant) with the caveat that there are insufficient clinical trial data to show a further robust benefit on cardiovascular outcomes. Of the different combination therapy options to potentiate low-density lipoprotein cholesterol lowering in combination with a statin, colesevelam provides additional beneficial effects by further reducing hemoglobin A1c levels in Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Safety profile of statins alone or combined with ezetimibe: a pooled analysis of 27 studies including over 22,000 patients treated for 6-24 weeks

Aims:  The aim of this analysis was to assess the overall safety and tolerability profiles of various statins + ezetimibe vs. statin monotherapy and to explore tolerability in sub-populations grouped by age, race, and sex. Methods:  Study-level data were combined from 27 double-blind, placebo-controlled or active-comparator trials that randomized adult hypercholesterolemic patients to statin or statin + ezetimibe for 6-24 weeks. In the full cohort, % patients with AEs within treatment groups (statin: N = 10,517; statin + ezetimibe: N = 11,714) was assessed by logistic regression with terms for first-/second-line therapy (first line = drug-naïve or rendered drug-naïve by washout at study entry; second line = ongoing statin at study entry or statin run-in), trial within first-/second-line therapy, and treatment. The same model was fitted for age (< 65, ≥ 65 years), sex, race (white, black, other) and first-/second-line subgroups with additional terms for subgroup and subgroup-by-treatment interaction. Results:  In the full cohort, the only significant difference between treatments was consecutive AST or ALT elevations ≥ 3 × upper limit of normal (ULN) (statin: 0.35%, statin + ezetimibe: 0.56%; p = 0.017). Significantly more subjects reported ≥ 1 AE; drug-related, hepatitis-related and gastrointestinal-related AEs; and CK elevations ≥ 10 × ULN (all p ≤ 0.008) in first-line vs. second-line therapy studies with both treatments. AEs were generally similar between treatments in subgroups, and similar rates of AEs were reported within age and race subgroups; however, women reported generally higher AE rates. Conclusions:  In conclusion, in second-line studies, ongoing statin treatment at study entry likely screened out participants for previous statin-related AEs and tolerability issues. These results describe the safety profiles of widely used lipid-lowering therapies and encourage their appropriate and judicious use in certain subpopulations.

Relative Efficacy of Antilipemic Agents in Non–High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Reduction

The investigators sought to summarize the percentage reduction in non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) achieved with various antilipemic regimens and to determine whether certain antilipemic regimens have been proven more effective in lowering non-HDL-C. A search of MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and Iowa Drug Information Service Database from 1970 to May 2011 was performed. Criteria were used to exclude studies not published in English, studies with methodology limitations, and studies with variables that may affect efficacy beyond the antilipemic agent administered. Only randomized, controlled trials comparing medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration were reviewed to determine whether significant differences in percentage reduction in non-HDL-C had been observed between different medication regimens. A total of 51 trials reported data that could be used to determine the range of percentage reduction in non-HDL-C achieved by select antilipemic regimens. Of these 51 trials, 38 provided head-to-head comparisons of antilipemic regimens. Rosuvastatin and atorvastatin are the most potent 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) in lowering non-HDL-C. Adding ezetimibe, fibric acid derivatives, and omega-3 fatty acids to antilipemic monotherapy may result in further reduction in non-HDL-C. Subjects with certain characteristics (eg, nonwhite) were not prevalent in these studies.

Response by sex to statin plus ezetimibe or statin monotherapy: a pooled analysis of 22,231 hyperlipidemic patients

Background

Despite documented benefits of lipid-lowering treatment in women, a considerable number are undertreated, and fewer achieve treatment targets vs. men.

Methods

Data were combined from 27 double-blind, active or placebo-controlled studies that randomized adult hypercholesterolemic patients to statin or statin+ezetimibe. Consistency of treatment effect among men (n = 11,295) and women (n = 10,499) was assessed and percent of men and women was calculated to evaluate the between-treatment ability to achieve specified treatment levels between sexes.

Results

Baseline lipids and hs-CRP were generally higher in women vs. men. Between-treatment differences were significant for both sexes (all p < 0.001 except apolipoprotein A-I in men = 0.0389). Men treated with ezetimibe+statin experienced significantly greater changes in LDL-C (p = 0.0066), non-HDL-C, total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-C, apolipoprotein A-I (all p < 0.0001) and apolipoprotein B (p = 0.0055) compared with women treated with ezetimibe+statin. The odds of achieving LDL-C < 100 mg/dL, apolipoprotein B < 90 mg/dL and the dual target [LDL-C < 100 mg/dL & apoliprotein B < 90 mg/dL] was significantly greater for women vs. men and the odds of achieving hs-CRP < 1 and < 2 mg/L and dual specified levels of [LDL-C < 100 mg/dL and hs-CRP < 2 mg/L] were significantly greater for men vs. women. Women reported significantly more gall-bladder-related, gastrointestinal-related, and allergic reaction or rash-related adverse events (AEs) vs. men (no differences between treatments). Men reported significantly more CK elevations (no differences between treatments) and hepatitis-related AEs vs. women (significantly more with ezetimibe+simvastatin vs. statin).

Conclusions

These results suggest that small sex-related differences may exist in response to lipid-lowering treatment and achievement of specified lipid and hs-CRP levels, which may have implications when managing hypercholesterolemia in women.

Combinations of ezetimibe with nonstatin drug regimens affecting lipid metabolism

In this article we discuss the available data on the effects of combined therapy of ezetimibe with agents affecting lipid metabolism other than statins. We consider studies evaluating the effects of combined therapy of ezetimibe with bile acid sequestrants, fenofibrate, niacin, n-3 fatty acids, plant sterols, orlistat, metformin, acarbose and glitazones. Combination of ezetimibe with bile acid sequestrants (especially colesevelam) was shown to have additional effects on lipid parameters in patients with hyperlipidemia. Combination of ezetimibe with fenofibrate may be a good approach to improve the overall lipid profile of patients with mixed hyperlipidemia. The addition of ezetimibe to niacin-based therapy can be useful for high-risk patients with dyslipidemia who are not achieving their assigned treatment goals. For patients who cannot tolerate statins there are useful combinations of ezetimibe with other drugs affecting lipid metabolism. These combinations improve many metabolic parameters, but more trials should be carried out to reach more robust conclusions about their effects on cardiovascular disease prevention.

Lipid-altering efficacy and safety profile of combination therapy with ezetimibe/statin vs. statin monotherapy in patients with and without diabetes: an analysis of pooled data from 27 clinical trials

AIM

This post hoc analysis compared the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe 10 mg plus statin (EZE/statin) vs. statin monotherapy in hypercholesterolaemic patients with and without diabetes.

METHODS

A pooled analysis of 27 previously published, randomized, double-blind, active- or placebo-controlled clinical trials comprising 21 794 adult patients with (n = 6541) and without (n = 15253) diabetes receiving EZE/statin or statin alone for 4-24 weeks evaluated percentage change from baseline in lipids and other parameters. Consistency of the treatment effect across the subgroups was tested using treatment × subgroup interaction. No multiplicity adjustments were made.

RESULTS

Treatment effects within both subgroups were generally consistent with the overall population. EZE/statin was more effective than statin alone in improving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TGs), non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein (apo) B and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in the overall population and both subgroups. Patients with diabetes achieved significantly larger reductions in LDL-C, TC and non-HDL-C compared with non-diabetic patients. Incidences of adverse events or creatine kinase elevations were similar between groups. A small but significantly higher incidence of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase elevations was seen in patients receiving EZE/statin (0.6%) vs. statin monotherapy (0.3%) in the overall population.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with EZE/statin vs. statin monotherapy provided significantly larger reductions in LDL-C, TC, TG, non-HDL-C, apo B and hs-CRP and significantly greater increases in HDL-C, with a similar safety profile in patients with and without diabetes. Reductions in LDL-C, TC and non-HDL-C were larger in patients with diabetes than in patients without diabetes.

Comparative efficacy of the addition of ezetimibe to statin vs statin titration in patients with hypercholesterolaemia: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and analyse evidence for cholesterol-lowering efficacy of at least 4 weeks of add-on ezetimibe vs doubling statin dose, in adults with primary hypercholesterolaemia.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched to identify randomised controlled trials of ezetimibe-statin combination vs statin titration (January 1993 - March 2010). Studies were selected using predefined criteria. Two reviewers conducted screening of articles, critical appraisal and data extraction; a third reviewer resolved disagreements. The difference between treatments was analysed for four co-primary outcomes: mean percentage change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and total cholesterol (TC); and proportion of patients achieving LDL-C treatment goal. Data were combined by two sets of direct comparison fixed and random effects meta-analysis: (1) compared data in the same treatment period between groups; (2) compared the incremental change in lipid levels of add-on ezetimibe vs doubling statin dose. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies including 5080 patients were included in the meta-analyses. Data on simvastatin, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin were analysed. Results for primary and secondary outcomes were in favour of the ezetimibe-statin combination. A significantly greater percentage reduction in LDL-C levels was achieved in patients treated with ezetimibe-statin vs statin monotherapy (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -14.1% [-16.1, -12.1], p < 0.001). Reduction in LDL-C levels attributed to add-on ezetimibe was significantly greater than that for statin dose doubling (WMD: -15.3% [-19.1, -11.4], p < 0.001). Achievement of LDL-C goal favoured add-on ezetimibe over statin titration and was statistically significant (odds ratio: LDL-C treatment goal 2.45 [1.95, 3.08], p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analyses were restricted by the limited number of studies with similar trial design and method of statin titration. Results indicate that add-on ezetimibe is significantly more effective in reducing LDL-C levels than doubling statin dose, enabling more patients to achieve LDL-C goal.

Effects of combined ezetimibe and simvastatin therapy as compared with simvastatin alone in patients with type 2 diabetes: a prospective randomized double-blind clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of inhibited gastrointestinal cholesterol absorption in statin-treated dyslipidemic patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In a multicenter prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, we primarily compared by ANCOVA the effect of 2-month ezetimibe (10 mg/day) or placebo therapy on LDL cholesterol serum levels in 108 type 2 diabetic patients with albuminuria <200 microg/min and total cholesterol concentrations >135 mg/dl despite simvastatin treatment (40 mg/day).

RESULTS

Unlike placebo, ezetimibe decreased LDL cholesterol from 99 +/- 31 to 66 +/- 22 mg/dl, total cholesterol from 162 +/- 36 to 124 +/- 30 mg/dl, and apolipoprotein B from 83 +/- 22 to 64 +/- 18 mg/dl (P < 0.0001 for all changes versus placebo). A total of 72 and 17% of patients on ezetimibe or placebo achieved LDL levels <70 mg/dl, respectively (P < 0.0001). Treatment was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding ezetimibe to simvastatin therapy helps to improve the pro-atherogenic lipoprotein profile in type 2 diabetic patients who fail to reach recommended lipid targets with statin therapy alone.

Ezetimibe/simvastatin vs simvastatin in coronary heart disease patients with or without diabetes

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines recommend LDL-C as the primary target of therapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia. Moreover, combination therapies with lipid-lowering drugs that have different mechanisms of action are recommended when it is not possible to attain LDL-C targets with statin monotherapy. Understanding which treatment or patient-related factors are associated with attaining a target may be clinically relevant.

METHODS

Data were pooled from two multicenter, randomized, double-blind studies. After stabilization on simvastatin 20 mg, patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) alone and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were randomized to ezetimibe 10 mg/simvastatin 20 mg (EZ/Simva) or simvastatin 40 mg. The change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), TC/HDL-C ratio, triglycerides, and the proportion of patients achieving LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) after 6 weeks of treatment were assessed, and factors significantly correlated with the probability of achieving LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L in a population of high cardiovascular risk Italian patients were identified. A stepwise logistic regression model was conducted with LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L at endpoint as the dependent variable and study, treatment, gender, age (> or = 65 years or < 65 years), as independent variables and baseline LDL-C (both as continuous and discrete variable).

RESULTS

EZ/Simva treatment (N = 93) resulted in significantly greater reductions in LDL-C, TC, and TC/HDL-C ratio and higher attainment of LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L vs doubling the simvastatin dose to 40 mg (N = 106). Study [including diabetic patients (OR = 2.9, p = 0.003)], EZ/Simva treatment (OR = 6.1, p < 0.001), and lower baseline LDL-C (OR = 0.9, p = 0.001) were significant positive predictors of LDL-C target achievement. When baseline LDL-C was expressed as a discrete variable, the odds of achieving LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L was 4.8 in favor of EZ/Simva compared with Simva 40 mg (p < 0.001), regardless of baseline LDL-C level.

CONCLUSION

EZ/Simva is an effective therapeutic option for patients who have not achieved recommended LDL-C treatment targets with simvastatin 20 mg monotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration numbers: NCT00423488 and NCT00423579.

Ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg versus simvastatin 40 mg in coronary heart disease patients

BACKGROUND

Reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is the primary goal of therapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia and coronary heart disease (CHD).

METHODS

This double blind placebo-controlled study enrolled patients 18 to 75 years of age with primary hypercholesterolemia and established CHD who were taking a stable daily dose of simvastatin 20 mg. Patients were randomized to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg (eze/simva; n = 56) or simvastatin 40 mg (simva; n = 56) for 6 weeks. Percent change from baseline in LDL-C, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides were assessed by use of the Student t test. The percent of patients achieving LDL-C less than 100 mg/dL (<2.6 mmol/L) or less than 80 mg/dL (<2.0 mmol/L) was analyzed via logistic regression with terms for treatment, baseline LDL-C, age, and gender.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Treatment with eze/simva combination resulted in significantly greater reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol, and triglycerides versus doubling the dose of simva to 40 mg (all P < .01). Significantly more patients achieved LDL-C less than 100 mg/dL (<2.6 mmol/L) and less than 80 mg/dL (<2.0 mmol/L) with ezetimibe/simvastatin versus doubling the dose of simva to 40 mg (73.2% vs 25.0%; P < .001) for simvastatin. Changes in HDL-C were similar between treatments. Both treatments were generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

In high-risk CHD patients with hypercholesterolemia, treatment with eze/simva combination resulted in significantly greater reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol and triglycerides, as well as greater achievement of recommended LDL-C targets, compared with doubling the simvastatin dose to 40 mg over the 6-week period. (

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00423579).

Ezetimibe + simvastatin versus doubling the dose of simvastatin in high cardiovascular risk diabetics: a multicenter, randomized trial (the LEAD study)

BACKGROUND

The primary goal of therapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia and coronary heart disease (CHD) is reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

Adult patients with T2DM and CHD (N = 93) on a stable dose of simvastatin 20 mg with LDL-C >or= 2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) and

RESULTS

EZ + simva 10/20 mg produced a significantly greater change from treated baseline compared with simvastatin 40 mg in LDL-C (-32.2% vs -20.8%; p < 0.01) and total cholesterol (-20.6% vs -13.2%; p < 0.01). A greater proportion of patients achieved LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L with EZ + simva 10/20 mg than with simvastatin 40 mg, but this was not statistically significant (78.4% vs 60%; odds ratio = 2.81; p = 0.052). Changes in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides were similar between treatments. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate that EZ + simva 10/20 mg may provide a superior alternative for LDL-C lowering vs doubling the dose of simvastatin to 40 mg in hyperlipidemic patients with T2DM and CHD. In addition, the combination therapy may provide an alternative treatment for patients who require further LDL-C reduction than they can achieve with simvastatin 20 mg alone.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings

• Aged
• Anticholesteremic Agents/administration & dosage
• Azetidines/administration & dosage
• Biomarkers/blood
• Blood Glucose/metabolism
• Cholesterol, HDL/blood
• Cholesterol, LDL/blood
• Coronary Disease/blood
• Coronary Disease/drug therapy
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood
• Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy
• Double-Blind Method
• Drug Combinations
• Ezetimibe, Simvastatin Drug Combination
• Female
• Glycated Hemoglobin/metabolism
• Humans
• Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage
• Hypercholesterolemia/blood
• Hypercholesterolemia/drug therapy
• Italy
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Odds Ratio
• Risk Assessment
• Risk Factors
• Simvastatin/administration & dosage
• Time Factors
• Treatment Outcome
• Triglycerides/blood

Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Gianluca Bardini Unit of Endocrinology, Department of Clinical Pathophysiology, University of Florence, Viale Pieraccini 6, 50139, Florence, Italy
Carlo B Giorda Diabetes Unit ASL Turin 5 Chieri, Italy
Antonio E Pontiroli Univeristy of Milan, Milan, Italy and San Paolo Hospital, via A di Rudinì 8, 20142 Milan, Italy
Cristina Le Grazie Medical Director, MSD, Centro Direzionale Milano Due, Palazzo Borromini, 20090 Segrate Milano, Italy
Carlo M Rotella Unit of Endocrinology, Department of Clinical Pathophysiology, University of Florence, Viale Pieraccini 6, 50139, Florence, Italy

Collapse

Impact of ezetimibe on cholesterol subfractions in dyslipidemic cardiac transplant recipients receiving statin therapy

BACKGROUND

Ezetimibe decreases cholesterol in cardiac transplant recipients intolerant to statins therapy. The effects of ezetimibe in addition to statins therapy and its relationship with the magnitude of dyslipidemia and statins utilization have not been studied in cardiac transplant recipients.

METHODS

The design of this investigation was a retrospective case control study. Twenty-two patients receiving the combination of therapy of statins plus ezetimibe were compared with 43 patients treated with statins only. The endpoints were assessed after three months of follow-up.

RESULTS

The addition of ezetimibe decreased low density lipoprotein-cholesterol by 25% compared with a 4% increase in patients receiving statins only. The impact of ezetimibe was similar regardless of the magnitude of dyslipidemia or statins dosage. Ezetimibe increase high density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol only in patients with baseline HDL-cholesterol above 1.3 mM/L (p < 0.05). There was an asymptomatic, but significant increase in creatinine kinase level [+31.4 +/- 8.1 (ezetimibe) vs. + 1.5 +/- 5.0 mM/L (placebo); p = 0.005].

CONCLUSION

Ezetimibe therapy provides a significant reduction in most cholesterol subfractions regardless of the magnitude of dyslipidemia and statins dosage.

Interpreting clinical trials of diabetic dyslipidaemia: new insights

Current treatment guidelines highlight the importance of aggressive lipid-modifying therapy in reducing cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes. Statins are established as the cornerstone of dyslipidaemia management in diabetic patients, based on their efficacy in lowering levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). However, statins fail to address the high residual cardiovascular risk in treated patients, some of which may be attributable to low HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) and elevated triglycerides and to a preponderance of small, dense LDL particles, indicating the need for further intervention. Fibrates are effective against all components of atherogenic dyslipidaemia associated with type 2 diabetes. Clinical studies, most notably the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes, indicate that fibrates, most likely in combination with a statin, have a secondary role in reducing cardiovascular risk in patients with type 2 diabetes, particularly in those without prior cardiovascular disease or patients with low HDL-C. Results are awaited from the ongoing Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes trial to fully evaluate the outcome benefits of this combination strategy.

Lipid-altering efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/40 mg compared with doubling the statin dose in patients admitted to the hospital for a recent coronary event: the INFORCE study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety profile of switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin (Eze/Simva) 10/40 mg compared with doubling the statin dose upon discharge in patients taking a statin and admitted to the hospital for the investigation of a coronary event.

DESIGN

This phase IV, multi-centre, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, parallel group study enrolled 424 patients (aged >/= 18 years) hospitalised for an acute coronary event and taking a stable dose of a statin (>/= 6 weeks) that could be doubled per the product label. Upon discharge from the hospital, patients were stratified by their statin dose/potency (high, medium and low) and randomised 1 : 1 to doubling of the statin dose (n = 211) or Eze/Simva 10/40 mg (n = 213) for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the absolute low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) value (mmol/l) at study end-point.

RESULTS

Mean baseline LDL-C for the two treatment groups were 2.48 and 2.31 mmol/l for the Eze/Simva and statin groups respectively. At study end-point, least squares mean LDL-C values were 1.74 mmol/l in the Eze/Simva group and 2.22 mmol/l in the statin group resulting in a significant between-group difference of -0.49 mmol/l (p </= 0.001). Eze/Simva 10/40 mg also produced significantly lower total cholesterol (-0.49 mmol/l), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [(non-HDL-C); -0.53 mmol/l] and apolipoprotein B (-0.14 mmol/l) values compared with doubling the statin dose (p </= 0.001 for all). Both treatments produced similar effects on triglycerides, C-reactive protein and HDL-C; the between treatment group differences were not significant (p >/= 0.160). Significantly more patients achieved LDL-C levels < 2.5 (< 100 mg/dl; 86% vs. 72%), < 2.0 (< 77 mg/dl; 70% vs. 42%) and < 1.8 mmol/l (< 70 mg/dl; 60% vs. 31%) with Eze/Simva than statin (all p </= 0.001). Eze/Simva was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to statin. There were no differences in the incidences of liver transaminases >/= 3 x upper limit of normal (ULN) or creatine kinase >/= 10 x ULN between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients taking a statin and admitted to the hospital for investigation of a coronary event, treatment with Eze/Simva 10/40 mg for 12 weeks produced greater improvements in lipids with a similar safety profile compared with doubling of the statin dose.

The impact of ezetimibe and high-dose of statin treatment on LDL levels in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia

We evaluated the efficacy and the safety of combining high doses of statins and ezetimibe in heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (hFH) patients. Seventy patients with hFH, received 10 mg of ezetimibe, in addition to their current statin therapy and were followed up for twelve months. The co-administration of statins and ezetimibe improved total cholesterol (p<0.05), LDL-c(p<0.05), triglycerides (p<0.05) and apolipoprotein-B (p<0.05) in comparison to statin monotherapy. There were no changes in high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c), apolipoprotein-A, lipoprotein (a), fibrinogen and C-reactive protein (CPR). In conclusion the combination of 10 mg of ezetimibe with high dose statin therapy is effective in hFH, offering a further reduction of LDL-c throughout the 12 months of follow up.

Ezetimibe, a selective inhibitor of the transport of cholesterol

Niemann-Pick C1-like 1 (NPC1L1) has recently been identified and has been shown to have features of a plasma membrane transporter, including a secretion signal, 13 predicted transmembrane domains, extensive N-linked glycosylation sites and a sterol-sensing domain. It is highly expressed on the surface of absorptive jejunal enterocytes. NPC1L1 has been shown to be a direct target of ezetimibe, and an ezetimibe-sensitive pathway plays a role in intestinal cholesterol absorption. Ezetimibe-based therapy represents an exciting new area in the treatment of dyslipidemia.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction: the end is more important than the means

Many epidemiologic studies and clinical trials have demonstrated the linear relation between elevated serum levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and the risk for coronary heart disease. Conversely, for each 1% reduction in LDL cholesterol in clinical trials, there is a corresponding 1% reduction in coronary heart disease risk. Although the degree of reduction is more important in affecting risk than the means used to lower LDL, statins are considered the most consistently effective means of lowering LDL. The National Cholesterol Education Program now recommends an optional goal of <70 mg/dl for patients at very high risk for coronary heart disease. In conclusion, on the basis of completed clinical trials, there is no evidence that achieving and maintaining such low levels of LDL cholesterol result in adverse effects. The most potent statins, rosuvastatin and atorvastatin, are capable of getting most patients to their LDL cholesterol goals, but combinations of statins with other drugs may be necessary for patients who require additional lipid lowering.

Efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 and 10/40 mg compared with atorvastatin 20 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM

This randomized, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy of switching from atorvastatin (ATV) 10 mg to ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) 10/20 mg, EZE/SIMVA 10/40 mg or doubling the dose of ATV from 10 to 20 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

Eligible patients had haemoglobin A(1C)< or =10%, were aged > or =18 years and were on ATV 10 mg for > or =6 weeks before study entry. After a 4-week open-label ATV 10 mg run-in, patients were randomized to EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (n = 220), EZE/SIMVA 10/40 mg (n = 222) or ATV 20 g (n = 219) daily for 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Greater (p < or = 0.001) reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (the primary end-point) were achieved by switching to EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (26.2%) or 10/40 mg (30.1%) than by doubling the dose of ATV to 20 mg (8.5%). EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg and 10/40 mg produced greater (p < or = 0.001) reductions in total cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B relative to ATV 20 mg. A reduction (p < or = 0.050) in C-reactive protein was observed with EZE/SIMVA 10/40 mg vs. ATV 20 mg. Similar reductions in triglycerides were observed across the three groups, and none of the treatments produced a significant change in HDL-C. A greater (p < or = 0.001) proportion of patients achieved LDL-C <2.5 mmol/l with EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (90.5%) and 10/40 mg (87.0%) than with ATV 20 mg (70.4%). Both EZE/SIMVA doses were generally well tolerated, with an overall safety profile similar to ATV 20 mg.

CONCLUSIONS

EZE/SIMVA 10/20 and 10/40 mg provided greater lipid-altering efficacy than doubling the dose of ATV from 10 to 20 mg and were well tolerated in patients with T2D.

Efficacy and tolerability of ezetimibe 10 mg/day coadministered with statins in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia who do not achieve target LDL-C while on statin monotherapy: A Canadian, multicentre, prospective study--the Ezetrol Add-On Study

BACKGROUND

For patients who have above-target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels while on statin monotherapy, coadministration of a cholesterol absorption inhibitor with the statin may decrease serum LDL-C levels and improve overall lipid profiles.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of ezetimibe 10 mg/day coadministered with a statin in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia who have higher than recommended LDL-C levels while on statin monotherapy.

METHODS

A six-week, prospective, multicentre study of eligible patients who had above-target LDL-C levels while on monotherapy with any statin, regardless of dose, for a minimum of four weeks. All patients were treated for six weeks with 10 mg ezetimibe daily coadministered with their current statins.

RESULTS

A total of 1141 patients were screened, 953 (83.5%) fulfilled the study inclusion criteria and 837 (87.8%) completed the study. Reasons for withdrawal included: lost to follow-up (50 patients [5.2%]); protocol violations (45 patients [4.7%]); adverse events (19 patients [2.0%]); and withdrawal of consent (two patients [0.2%]). After six weeks of treatment, statistically significant (P = 0.001) mean reductions were observed in LDL-C (30.05%), total cholesterol (20.84%), triglycerides (10.16%), apolipoprotein B (19.84%) and the total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (19.88%). At six weeks, 674 patients (80.5%) achieved target LDL-C levels. Fifty predominantly mild, nonserious adverse events related to ezetimibe were reported by 32 patients (3.4%). Frequently reported adverse events included constipation (n = 7 [0.7% of patients]), diarrhea (n = 4 [0.4%]) and dizziness (n = 4 [0.4%]).

CONCLUSION

Ezetimibe coadministered with statins is effective in reducing LDL-C in patients who do not attain target LDL-C levels while on statin monotherapy.

Non-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-associated actions of ezetimibe: an overview

Ezetimibe, an intestinal cholesterol absorption inhibitor, lowers circulating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels both when administered as monotherapy and in combination with other hypolipidaemic drugs, mostly statins. This review focuses on the effects of ezetimibe on non-LDL-C-associated variables. In most studies, ezetimibe effectively reduced triglyceride and increased high density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. The authors also consider the effect of ezetimibe on other variables such as C-reactive protein levels, insulin sensitivity and endothelial function. Ezetimibe is useful in patients with sitosterolaemia (a rare inherited disorder) as it significantly reduces plasma phytosterol concentrations. Ezetimibe fulfils two of the three essential characteristics of any drug (efficacy and safety). However, clinical studies are required to provide evidence of its ability to reduce vascular events.

Ezetimibe added to ongoing statin therapy improves LDL-C goal attainment and lipid profile in patients with diabetes or metabolic syndrome

This analysis of the Ezetimibe Add-on to Statin for Effectiveness (EASE) trial examined the effectiveness and safety of ezetimibe 10 mg added to ongoing statin therapy in patients with diabetes, metabolic syndrome without diabetes, or neither disorder who had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels exceeding National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III) goals. After six weeks of treatment, ezetimibe added to statin reduced LDL-C in patients with diabetes by 28%, metabolic syndrome by 24%, or neither by 26%, compared with a 3% reduction for placebo for each group. In each group, more patients receiving ezetimibe plus statin reached LDL-C goal (67-74%) compared with those receiving placebo plus statin (19-22%). Other parameters demonstrating greater improvement with ezetimibe included triglycerides, apolipoprotein (Apo)B/Apo A-I ratio, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and C-reactive protein. Ezetimibe plus statin was well tolerated in each group. Ezetimibe added to ongoing statin therapy offers a new treatment option that is consistently effective in improvement of lipid profiles and attainment of LDL-C goals in patients with without diabetes or metabolic syndrome.

Reaching goal in hypercholesterolaemia: dual inhibition of cholesterol synthesis and absorption with simvastatin plus ezetimibe

Lowering serum cholesterol levels reduces the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD)-related events. Statins are commonly prescribed as first-line treatment but many patients at high-risk for CHD still fail to reach their cholesterol or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals with statin monotherapy. National and international guidelines for the prevention of CHD recommend the modification of lipid profiles and particularly LDL-C [e.g. the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III; 2001) and Third Joint Task Force of European and other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (2003) Guidelines]. Several recent clinical trials indicated an added benefit from aggressive lowering of LDL-C levels. Based on these findings, the NCEP ATP III revised the LDL-C target from < 100 mg/dL (2.6 mmol/L) to < 70 mg/dL (1.8 mmol/L) (optional target) for very high-risk patients and < 130 mg/dL (3.4 mmol/L) to < 100 mg/dL (2.6 mmol/L) for moderately high-risk patients. For patients who fail to achieve their LDL-C target, inhibiting the two main sources of cholesterol - synthesis and uptake - can produce more effective lipid lowering, allowing more patients to reach their LDL-C goal. Ezetimibe is a highly-selective inhibitor of cholesterol absorption and simvastatin is an evidence-based inhibitor of cholesterol synthesis. The LDL-C-lowering efficacy of targeting both major sources of cholesterol with ezetimibe plus simvastatin was demonstrated in several multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in patients with hypercholesterolaemia. For patients who do not reach their cholesterol goal with a statin, adding ezetimibe 10 mg significantly reduces LDL-C compared with statin monotherapy. Thus, this treatment option may help patients reach the new 'stricter' cholesterol goals. This review, based on a Medline database search from January 2000 to August 2005, considers the LDL-C-lowering efficacy of ezetimibe and discusses the role of this agent for patients who fail to achieve guideline cholesterol goals with statin monotherapy.

Type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and vascular risk: rationale and evidence for correcting the lipid imbalance

Type 2 diabetes is an important cardiovascular risk factor. A significant component of the risk associated with type 2 diabetes is thought to be because of its characteristic lipid "triad" profile of raised small dense low-density lipoprotein levels, lowered high-density lipoprotein, and elevated triglycerides (TGs). Trials of statins and fibrates have included substantial numbers of patients with diabetes and indicate that lipid lowering reduces cardiovascular event rates in these patients. However, statins alone do not always address all the lipid abnormalities of diabetes. Fibrates, which have low affinity for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARalpha), improve most aspects of the atherogenic dyslipidemia of diabetes. Chronic elevations of free fatty acids (FFA) induce insulin resistance and contribute to the lipid triad of diabetes. Therefore, reducing their levels is likely to ameliorate insulin resistance and improve the lipid triad of diabetes. PPARs are intimately involved in the regulation of FFA: PPARalpha modulation increases FFA catabolism and PPARgamma agonism (eg, by thiazolidinediones) increases TG lipolysis, FFA transport, conversion of FFA to TGs, and safe storage of FFA. Integrating potent PPARalpha and PPARgamma activity may deliver greater improvement of the diabetic dyslipidemic profile and its attendant risks than selective PPAR activation.