A comparison of efficacy and safety of an ezetimibe/simvastatin combination compared with other intensified lipid-lowering treatment strategies in diabetic patients with symptomatic cardiovascular disease

The safety and efficacy of Ezetimibe Plus Statins on ASVD and Related Diseases

It is well known that atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASVD) in the elderly is a global disease with high morbidity, mortality and disability, and plasma LDL-C correction is the most important strategy for ASVD control. However, a large proportion of patients failed to achieve their ideal LDL-C goals after statins use. Ezetimibe, a newly non-statin lipid-lowering agent, is an inhibitor of exogenous cholesterol absorption. Whereby, ezetimibe plus statins may reduce LDL-C more strongly than statins alone. Differed from any other papers published previously, which only involved ezetimibe plus statins for coronary heart disease, the highlight of this paper is to summarize the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe plus statins in all kinds of ASVD subtypes and their related diseases, mainly included aortic atherosclerosis, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular and peripheral artery diseases. Obviously, this paper is inimitable, which will provide the readers an important reference, especially in treating the elderly with multi-organs atherosclerosis.

Ezetimibe in high-risk, previously treated statin patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of lipid efficacy

PURPOSE

While statins are used as first-line treatments for high-risk patients with hypercholesterolemia, statin monotherapy is often insufficient to achieve target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Second-line treatment options include up-titration of statin dose, switching to a more potent statin, or combination therapy, e.g., with ezetimibe. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of adding ezetimibe to simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin monotherapy versus doubling the dosage or switching to a higher-potency statin in a population of patients with hypocholesterolemia at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and who had been previously treated with a statin.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed and evidence bases were established for populations of atorvastatin-, simvastatin-, and rosuvastatin-experienced patients using eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Based on the available data, we constructed networks of evidence and conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) within each statin population. The primary outcome of interest was percent change from baseline in LDL-C. Changes in total cholesterol were explored as a secondary outcome.

FINDINGS

Across all patient populations, 35 RCTs were identified and included in the evidence base. Among patients on simvastatin therapy, the addition of ezetimibe resulted in a mean difference (MD) in LDL-C of - 13.62% (95% CrI - 19.99, - 6.91; see table below) compared to doubling the starting dose of simvastatin. In the population of patients on atorvastatin therapy, the addition of ezetimibe resulted in an MD in LDL-C of - 14.71% (95% CrI - 16.46, - 12.95) compared to doubling the starting dose of atorvastatin. The addition of ezetimibe to rosuvastatin resulted in an MD in LDL-C of - 14.96% (95% CrI - 17.79, - 12.11), compared to doubling the starting rosuvastatin dose. Similar trends were observed for changes in total cholesterol.

IMPLICATIONS

Given the available data, the addition of ezetimibe to ongoing simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin monotherapy offers greater reduction in LDL-C among patients at high risk of CVD compared to doubling the initial statin dose.

Study on the HPLC-based separation of some ezetimibe stereoisomers and the underlying stereorecognition process

The enantioseparation of ezetimibe stereoisomers by high-performance liquid chromatography on different chiral stationary phases, ie, 3 polysaccharide-based chiral columns, was studied. It was observed that cellulose-based Chiralpak IC column exhibited the best resolving ability. After the optimization of mobile phase compositions in both normal and reversed phase modes, satisfactory separation could be obtained on Chiralpak IC column, especially in normal phase mode. The use of prohibited solvents as nonstandard mobile phase gave rise to better resolution than that of standard mobile phases (n-hexane/alcohol system). In addition, the presence of ethanol in nonstandard mobile phase has played an important role in enhancing chromatographic efficiency and resolution between ezetimibe stereoisomers. Various attempts were made to comprehensively compare the chiral recognition capabilities of immobilized versus coated polysaccharide-based chiral columns, amylose-based versus cellulose-based chiral stationary phases, reversed versus normal phase modes, and standard versus nonstandard mobile phases. Moreover, possible solute-mobile phase-stationary phase interactions were derived to explain how stationary and mobile phases affected the separation. Then the method validation with respect to selectivity, linearity, precision, accuracy, and robustness was carried out, which was demonstrated to be suitable and accurate for the quantitative determination of (RRS)-ezetimibe impurity in ezetimibe bulk drug.

Effect of fixed-dose combinations of ezetimibe plus rosuvastatin in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: MRS-ROZE (Multicenter Randomized Study of ROsuvastatin and eZEtimibe)

AIM

We aimed to compare the effects of fixed-dose combinations of ezetimibe plus rosuvastatin to rosuvastatin alone in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia, including a subgroup analysis of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) or metabolic syndrome (MetS).

METHOD

This multicenter eight-week randomized double-blind phase III study evaluated the safety and efficacy of fixed-dose combinations of ezetimibe 10 mg plus rosuvastatin, compared with rosuvastatin alone in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Four hundred and seven patients with primary hypercholesterolemia who required lipid-lowering treatment according to the ATP III guideline were randomized to one of the following six treatments for 8 weeks: fixed-dose combinations with ezetimibe 10 mg daily plus rosuvastatin (5, 10, or 20 mg daily) or rosuvastatin alone (5, 10, or 20 mg daily).

RESULTS

Fixed-dose combination of ezetimibe plus rosuvastatin significantly reduced LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and triglyceride levels compared with rosuvastatin alone. Depending on the rosuvastatin dose, these fixed-dose combinations of ezetimibe plus rosuvastatin provided LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and triglyceride reductions of 56%-63%, 37%-43%, and 19%-24%, respectively. Moreover, the effect of combination treatment on cholesterol levels was more pronounced in patients with DM or MetS than in non-DM or non-MetS patients, respectively, whereas the effect of rosuvastatin alone did not differ between DM vs non-DM or MetS vs non-MetS patients.

CONCLUSION

Fixed-dose combinations of ezetimibe and rosuvastatin provided significantly superior efficacy to rosuvastatin alone in lowering LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and triglyceride levels. Moreover, the reduction rate was greater in patients with DM or MetS.

Ezetimibe/statin combination therapy to treat patients with type 2 diabetes

Patients with diabetes represent a population at higher risk for cardiovascular disease. Diabetic dyslipidemia is characterized by the so-called atherogenic lipid triad, consisting of an increase in small dense low density lipoprotein particles and in triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, and a decrease in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, with an increase in non-HDL cholesterol. Numerous trials have investigated the efficacy of add-on ezetimibe therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes and not controlled by statin therapy. The published data highly suggest that patients with type 2 diabetes may be more likely to benefit from ezetimibe/statin combination therapy. However, evidence specifically addressing hard clinical endpoints and prospective trials addressing differences in response between patients with or without diabetes are still needed.

Effect of Switching From Statin Monotherapy to Ezetimibe/Simvastatin Combination Therapy Compared With Other Intensified Lipid-Lowering Strategies on Lipoprotein Subclasses in Diabetic Patients With Symptomatic Cardiovascular Disease

Background

Patients with diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease may not achieve adequate low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) lowering on statin monotherapy, attributed partly to atherogenic dyslipidemia. More intensive LDL‐C–lowering therapy can be considered for these patients. A previous randomized, controlled study demonstrated greater LDL‐C lowering in diabetic patients with symptomatic cardiovascular disease who switched from simvastatin 20 mg (S20) or atorvastatin 10 mg (A10) to combination ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg (ES10/20) therapy, compared with statin dose‐doubling (to S40 or A20) or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg (R10). The effect of these regimens on novel biomarkers of atherogenic dyslipidemia (low‐ and high‐density lipoprotein particle number and lipoprotein‐associated phospholipase A2 [Lp‐PLA₂]) was assessed.

Methods and Results

Treatment effects on low‐ and high‐density lipoprotein particle number (by NMR) and Lp‐PLA₂ (by ELISA) were evaluated using plasma samples available from 358 subjects in the study. Switching to ES10/20 reduced low‐density lipoprotein‐particle number numerically more than did statin dose‐doubling and was comparable with R10 (−133.3, −94.4, and −56.3 nmol/L, respectively; P>0.05). Increases in high‐density lipoprotein particle number were significantly greater with switches to ES10/20 versus statin dose‐doubling (1.5 and −0.5 μmol/L; P<0.05) and comparable with R10 (0.7 μmol/L; P>0.05). Percentages of patients attaining low‐density lipoprotein particle number levels <990 nmol/L were 62.4% for ES10/20, 54.1% for statin dose‐doubling, and 57.0% for R10. Switching to ES10/20 reduced Lp‐PLA₂ activity significantly more than did statin dose‐doubling (−28.0 versus −3.8 nmol/min per mL, P<0.05) and was comparable with R10 (−28.0 versus −18.6 nmol/min per mL; P>0.05); effects on Lp‐PLA₂ concentration were modest.

Conclusions

In diabetic patients with dyslipidemia, switching from statins to combination ES10/20 therapy generally improved lipoprotein subclass profile and Lp‐PLA₂ activity more than did statin dose‐doubling and was comparable with R10, consistent with its lipid effects.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00862251.

Ezetimibe ameliorates atherogenic lipids profiles, insulin resistance and hepatocyte growth factor in obese patients with hypercholesterolemia

Background

Ezetimibe ameliorates serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) and it has been approved for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. However, the effects of ezetimibe on specific biomarkers have not been fully clarified in obese Japanese patients.

Methods

A total of 101 patients (47 males and 54 females) were registered in this study during 2011 and 2012. All patients were over 20 years old, were obese [body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25kg/m²] and had hypercholesterolemia (LDL-c ≥ 120mg/dl). After excluding 10 subjects (7 who dropped out and 3 with missing data), 91 patients (39 males and 52 females) were analyzed. They were treated with 10 mg ezetimibe once a day for 24 weeks and were evaluated at 12 and 24 weeks.

Results

Following 12 weeks of ezetimibe therapy, BMI (p < 0.001), waist circumference (p < 0.001), total cholesterol (p < 0.001), LDL-c (p < 0.001), non high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-c] (p < 0.001), triglycerides (p < 0.05) and remnant-like particle cholesterol (RLP-c; p < 0.001) were significantly decreased. Following 24 weeks of ezetimibe therapy, BMI (p < 0.05), waist circumference (p < 0.001), total cholesterol (p < 0.001), LDL-c (p < 0.001), non HDL-c (p < 0.001), triglycerides (p < 0.05), RLP-c (p < 0.001), insulin (p < 0.05) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF; p < 0.05) were significantly decreased. In contrast, HDL-c (p < 0.001) was significantly increased.

Conclusions

Ezetimibe ameliorated not only atherogenic lipid profiles but also anthropometric factors, insulin resistance and biomarkers such as HGF. Ezetimibe may have pleiotropic effects on obese patients with hypercholesterolemia.

Statins for primary prevention of venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in clinical practice. The efficacy of statins in the primary prevention of VTE remains unproven. This is an update of the review first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of statins in the primary prevention of VTE.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases (PVD) Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched February 2014) and CENTRAL (2014, Issue 1).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed statins in the primary prevention of VTE were considered. The outcomes we evaluated were the rates of VTE, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, death and adverse events. Two authors (L Li, JH Tian) independently selected RCTs against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third author (KH Yang).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction was independently carried out by two authors (L Li, JH Tian). Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third author (PZ Zhang). Two authors (L Li, JH Tian) independently assessed the risk of bias according to a standard quality checklist provided by the PVD Group.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update we included one RCT with 17,802 participants that assessed rosuvastatin compared with placebo for the prevention of VTE. The quality of the evidence was moderate because of imprecision, as the required sample size for the outcomes of this review was not achieved. Analysis showed that when compared with placebo rosuvastatin reduced the incidence of VTE (odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.86) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.79), the risk of any (fatal and non-fatal) myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.69), and any (fatal and non-fatal) stroke (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.78). There was no difference in the incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.46), fatal MI (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.53 to 4.22), fatal stroke (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.09) or death after VTE (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.24). The incidence of any serious adverse events was no different between the rosuvastatin and placebo groups (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.20).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence showed that rosuvastatin was associated with a reduced incidence of VTE, but the evidence was limited to a single RCT and any firm conclusions and suggestions could be not drawn. Randomised controlled trials of statins (including rosuvastatin) are needed to evaluate their efficacy in the prevention of VTE.

Ezetimibe combined with standard diet and exercise therapy improves insulin resistance and atherosclerotic markers in patients with metabolic syndrome

Aims/Introduction

Ezetimibe lowers serum lipid levels by inhibiting intestinal absorption of dietary and biliary cholesterol. However, the effect of ezetimibe on insulin resistance remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to examine this issue in patients with metabolic syndrome in local-dwelling Japanese, who were not being treated with lipid-lowering drugs.

Materials and Methods

In 2009, 1,943 participants received a health examination in the Tanushimaru Study, a Japanese cohort of the Seven Countries Study, of whom 490 participants had metabolic syndrome. Among them, 61 participants (41 men and 20 women) were examined in the present study. They were treated with 10 mg of ezetimibe once a day for 24 weeks, combined with standard diet and exercise therapy.

Results

Bodyweight (P < 0.001), body mass index (P < 0.001), systolic blood pressure (P = 0.003), diastolic blood pressure (P < 0.001), triglycerides (P = 0.002), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P = 0.001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P < 0.001) and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (P = 0.011) significantly decreased after the observational period. There were no statistically significant differences in the effects of ezetimibe between men and women. Univariate analysis showed that the reduction of homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance was not associated with the improvement of other metabolic components.

Conclusions

Ezetimibe combined with standard diet and exercise therapy improves not only bodyweight and atherogenic lipid profiles, but also insulin resistance, blood pressure and anthropometric factors in metabolic syndrome in local-dwelling Japanese. Interestingly, the improvement of insulin resistance had no correlation with other metabolic components.

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.

Atorvastatin inhibits hyperglycemia-induced expression of osteopontin in the diabetic rat kidney via the p38 MAPK pathway

Osteopontin (OPN), a large phosphoglycoprotein adhesion molecule, which is up-regulated in the kidneys of humans and mice with diabetes, has emerged as a potentially key pathophysiological contributor in diabetic nephropathy. Here, we investigated the role of OPN in kidney injury caused by diabetic nephropathy and the effect of atorvastatin on the expression of OPN and on diabetic nephropathy. Diabetes was induced with streptozotocin in rats, and atorvastatin (5 mg/kg) was orally administered once a day for 8 weeks. We analyzed the expression and regulation of OPN in the kidneys of streptozotocin-induced diabetic Sprague-Dawley albino rats by immunohistochemistry and western blot analysis. The expression of OPN was increased in diabetic rat kidney, and atorvastatin inhibited this process. Atorvastatin also decreased the expression and phosphorylation of p38. In vitro, atorvastatin inhibited the high glucose-induced OPN expression in Madin-Darby canine kidney epithelial cells through the p38 MAPK signaling pathway. These results suggested that atorvastatin reduced the expression of OPN through inhibition of the p38 MAPK pathway. The expression of OPN was associated with kidney injury. These molecules may represent therapeutic targets for the prevention of acute kidney injury induced by diabetes.

Consistency of effect of ezetimibe/simvastatin compared with intensified lipid-lowering treatment strategies in obese and non-obese diabetic subjects

PURPOSE

This post hoc analysis assessed switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg vs doubling the baseline statin dose to simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg in subgroups of obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) and non-obese (BMI <30 kg/m2) diabetic subjects.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, 12-week study of adults 18-79 years with cardiovascular disease with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 and ≤160 mg/dl. Percent change in LDL-C and other lipids was estimated.

RESULTS

In obese subjects (n = 466), percent changes in LDL-C and most other lipids were greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin vs doubling the baseline statin dose or switching to rosuvastatin. In non-obese subjects (n = 342), percent changes in LDL-C, total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, Apo B and Apo A-I were greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin vs doubling the baseline statin dose or switching to rosuvastatin; and treatment with ezetimibe/simvastatin resulted in greater changes in triglycerides vs rosuvastatin and HDL-C vs doubling the baseline statin dose. The safety profiles were generally similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of baseline obesity status, switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin was more effective at reducing LDL-C, total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, and Apo B vs doubling the baseline statin dose to simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg.

The efficacy and safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin combination compared with intensified lipid-lowering treatment strategies in diabetic subjects with and without metabolic syndrome

AIMS

The objective was to assess the consistency of effect of switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg versus doubling the baseline statin dose (to simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg) or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg across subgroups of subjects with (n = 617) and without (n = 191) metabolic syndrome (MetS).

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, 6-week study of adults 18-79 years with cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 and ≤160 mg/dl. The percent change in LDL-C and other lipids was estimated within each subgroup separately. Safety and tolerability were assessed.

RESULTS

In subjects with MetS, percent changes in LDL-C and other lipids were greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin versus doubling baseline statin or numerically greater versus switching to rosuvastatin, except high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein (Apo) AI (mean percent changes in LDL-C were: -22.49% ezetimibe/simvastatin, -9.64% doubled baseline statin and -19.20% rosuvastatin). In subjects without MetS, percent changes in LDL-C, total cholesterol and Apo B were greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin versus doubling baseline statin or numerically greater versus switching to rosuvastatin (mean percent changes in LDL-C were: -25.14% ezetimibe/simvastatin, -4.75% doubled baseline statin and -19.75% rosuvastatin). Safety profiles were generally similar.

CONCLUSION

These results showed that switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg was more effective at reducing LDL-C, total cholesterol and Apo B versus doubling the baseline statin dose to simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg regardless of MetS status. These results were generally similar to those of the full cohort.