The effects of different doses of atorvastatin on plasma endothelin-1 levels in type 2 diabetic patients with dyslipidemia

We investigated the effects of three different daily doses (10 mg, 20 mg, and 40 mg) of atorvastatin, a relatively new and potent statin, on plasma endothelin (ET)-1 and highly sensitive C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in type 2 diabetic subjects. Twenty-nine type 2 diabetic patients with dyslipidemia were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive atorvastatin orally at 10 mg (A10; n = 10), 20 mg (A20; n = 10), or 40 mg (A40; n = 9) daily for 12 weeks. Levels of plasma total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (C) in all three studied groups were significantly decreased after treatment with atorvastatin for 12 weeks (all groups, P < 0.001). However, the greatest LDL-C lowering effect and the highest percentage of subjects achieving the National Cholesterol Education Program's Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III) LDL-C goal were observed in the A20 group. All diabetic subjects had a higher plasma ET-1 concentration (A10, 1.02 +/- 0.37 pg/ml, mean +/- SD; A20, 1.17 +/- 0.55 pg/ml; and A40, 0.87 +/- 0.45 pg/ml) than that of age- and sex-matched normal control subjects (0.64 +/- 0.15 pg/ml; all groups, P < 0.001). Plasma ET-1 levels showed a borderline significant decrease at the end of study, by 22% in diabetic subjects treated with 10 mg atorvastatin (P = 0.05 compared with baseline), and by 30% in subjects treated with 20 mg atorvastatin (P = 0.06, compared with baseline). Paradoxically, the 40-mg dose of atorvastatin provided an increase of 2% in plasma ET-1 levels at the end of study, which is significantly different (P < 0.05) and marginally significant (P = 0.057) from the levels of the 10- and 20-mg doses, respectively. Similarly, although insignificantly, plasma concentrations of CRP also tended to decrease by 12% and 48%, and paradoxically increased by 18% in diabetic patients treated with 10 mg, 20 mg, and 40 mg atorvastatin, respectively. The clinical significance of these biphasic lipid-independent statin effects is unknown and the present study suggests that 20 mg atorvastatin may have the best benefits in treating diabetic patients with dyslipidemia.

Achieving 2003 European lipid goals with rosuvastatin and comparator statins in 6743 patients in real-life clinical practice: DISCOVERY meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing body of evidence to support the benefits of reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels and this has been reflected in a lowering of LDL-C goals recommended by international guidelines. Therefore, there is a growing need for effective lipid-modifying therapies to optimise the achievement of these more stringent LDL-C goals.

OBJECTIVE

A meta-analysis of data pooled from five studies participating in the DISCOVERY (DIrect Statin COmparison of LDL-C Values: an Evaluation of Rosuvastatin therapY) Programme was performed to compare the effect of rosuvastatin treatment with other statins in real-life clinical practice.

RESULTS

These studies included 6743 patients with hypercholesterolaemia from different ethnicities, countries and cultural environments. The meta-analysis showed that significantly more patients receiving rosuvastatin 10 mg achieved the 2003 European LDL-C goals compared with those who received atorvastatin 10 mg or simvastatin 20 mg (p < 0.001 for both comparisons). A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving rosuvastatin 10 mg also achieved the 2003 European total cholesterol goal compared with those on atorvastatin 10 mg (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis showed that rosuvastatin was more effective than comparator statins at lowering LDL-C levels and enabling patients to achieve lipid goals at recommended start doses. In addition, all statins studied were well tolerated and confirmed that rosuvastatin had a similar safety profile to other statins.

[Regression of a large lipid-rich pool in the coronary artery during treatment with statin detected by intravascular ultrasound: a case report]

A 54-year-old man with unstable angina presented with severe stenosis of the middle segment of the left anterior descending coronary artery. Percutaneous coronary stent implantation and serial intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) were performed. IVUS detected a non-culprit coronary plaque with a large lipid-rich pool in the proximal segment of the left anterior descending coronary artery. Atorvastatin 10 mg/day was given to reduce his cholesterol level for 2 years after the stent implantation. This patient had no cardiac events, and the low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level reduced from 171 to 88 mg/dl at follow-up. Two-year follow-up IVUS examination revealed the reduction of plaque burden associated with regression of the lipid-rich pool size. This case may indicate that statin could contribute to the regression of lipid-rich plaque and to the stability of coronary plaque.

Treating to target patients with primary hyperlipidaemia: comparison of the effects of ATOrvastatin and ROSuvastatin (the ATOROS study)

OBJECTIVES

In a 24-week, open-label, randomized, parallel-group study, we compared the efficacy and metabolic effects, beyond low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)-lowering, of atorvastatin (ATV) and rosuvastatin (RSV) in cardiovascular disease-free subjects with primary hyperlipidaemia, treated to an LDL-C target (130 mg/dL).

METHODS

After a 6-week dietary lead-in period, patients were randomized to RSV 10 mg/day (n = 60) or ATV 20 mg/day (n = 60). After 6 weeks on treatment the dose of the statin was increased (to RSV 20 mg/day or ATV 40 mg/day) if the treatment goal was not achieved. A control group of healthy volunteers (n = 60) was also included for the validation of baseline serum and urinary laboratory parameters. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients reaching the LDL-C goal; secondary outcomes were changes in lipid and non-lipid metabolic parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients (75.0%) in the RSV-treated group and 43 (71.7%) in the ATV-treated group achieved the treatment target at the initial dose. Both regimens were generally well tolerated and there were no withdrawals due to treatment-related serious adverse events. Similar significant reductions in total cholesterol, LDL-C, apolipoprotein (apo) B, triglycerides, apoB/apoA1 ratio, fibrinogen and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels were seen. RSV had a significant high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)-raising effect and showed a trend towards increasing apoA1 levels. Glycaemic control and renal function parameters were not influenced by statin therapy. ATV, but not RSV, showed a significant hypouricaemic effect.

CONCLUSIONS

RSV and ATV were equally efficacious in achieving LDL-C treatment goals in patients with primary hyperlipidaemia at the initial dose and following dose titration. RSV seems to have a significantly higher HDL-C-raising effect, while ATV lowers serum uric acid levels.

Vascular endothelial growth factor mediates atorvastatin-induced mammalian achaete-scute homologue-1 gene expression and neuronal differentiation after stroke in retired breeder rats

Neurogenesis declines with advancing age. The mammalian achaete-scute homologue-1 encodes a basic helix-loop-helix transcription factor, which controls neuronal differentiation. In this study, we first tested whether atorvastatin treatment enhances neurological functional outcome and neuronal differentiation after stroke in retired breeder 12 month rats. Rats were subjected to middle cerebral artery occlusion and treated with or without atorvastatin (3 mg/kg) for 7 days. Atorvastatin significantly increased expression of mammalian achaete-scute homologue-1, beta-tubulin III, and vascular endothelial growth factor in the ischemic brain, and concomitantly improved functional outcome compared with middle cerebral artery occlusion control rats. Increased neurogenesis significantly correlated with functional recovery after stroke. To further investigate the mechanisms of atorvastatin-induced neuronal differentiation, experiments were performed on neurospheres derived from retired breeder rat subventricular zone cells. Atorvastatin increased neuronal differentiation and upregulated vascular endothelial growth factor and mammalian achaete-scute homologue-1 gene expression in cultured neurospheres. Vascular endothelial growth factor-treated neurospheres significantly increased mammalian achaete-scute homologue-1 and beta-tubulin III expression. Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor decreased atorvastatin-induced mammalian achaete-scute homologue-1 and beta-tubulin III expression. These data indicate that atorvastatin increases neuronal differentiation in retired breeder rats. In addition, atorvastatin upregulation of vascular endothelial growth factor expression, influences mammalian achaete-scute homologue-1 transcription factor, which in turn, facilitates an increase in subventricular zone neuronal differentiation. These atorvastatin-mediated molecular events may contribute to the improved functional outcome in retired breeder rats subjected to stroke.

Achieving LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B target levels in high-risk patients: Measuring Effective Reductions in Cholesterol Using Rosuvastatin therapY (MERCURY) II

BACKGROUND

National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines for patients at a high risk of coronary heart disease set a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target of < 100 mg/dL. This target can be difficult to attain with diet and current therapy.

METHODS

In a 16-week multinational trial, 1993 high-risk patients were randomized to rosuvastatin 20 mg, atorvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, or simvastatin 40 mg for 8 weeks. Patients either remained on starting treatment or switched to lower or milligram-equivalent doses of rosuvastatin for 8 more weeks.

RESULTS

At 16 weeks, more patients achieved their LDL-C target by switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg than staying on atorvastatin 10 mg (66% vs 42%, P < .001) or simvastatin 20 mg (73% vs 32%, P < .001). Changing to rosuvastatin 20 mg brought more patients to their LDL-C target than staying on atorvastatin 20 mg (79% vs 64%, P < .001) or simvastatin 40 mg (84% vs 56%, P < .001). More very high risk patients achieved an LDL-C target of < 70 mg/dL when changed to rosuvastatin from atorvastatin or simvastatin (within-arm comparisons P < .01). More hypertriglyceridemic patients (triglycerides > or = 200 mg/dL) met LDL-C, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and apolipoprotein B targets by changing to rosuvastatin. Switching to rosuvastatin produced greater reductions in LDL-C, total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B, and lipid ratios. All treatments were well tolerated, with no differences among treatment groups in skeletal muscle, hepatic, or renal toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Rosuvastatin 10 or 20 mg is an effective and safe therapeutic option for high-risk patients to achieve their lipid and apolipoprotein targets.

Atorvastatin-induced cardioprotection is mediated by increasing inducible nitric oxide synthase and consequent S-nitrosylation of cyclooxygenase-2

We determined the effects of cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1; SC-560), COX-2 (SC-58125), and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS; 1400W) inhibitors on atorvastatin (ATV)-induced myocardial protection and whether iNOS mediates the ATV-induced increases in COX-2. Sprague-Dawley rats received 10 mg ATV·kg−1·day−1 added to drinking water or water alone for 3 days and received intravenous SC-58125, SC-560, 1400W, or vehicle alone. Anesthesia was induced with ketamine and xylazine and maintained with isoflurane. Fifteen minutes after intravenous injection rats underwent 30-min myocardial ischemia followed by 4-h reperfusion [infarct size (IS) protocol], or the hearts were explanted for biochemical analysis and immunoblotting. Left ventricular weight and area at risk (AR) were comparable among groups. ATV reduced IS to 12.7% (SD 3.1) of AR, a reduction of 64% vs. 35.1% (SD 7.6) in the sham-treated group ( P < 0.001). SC-58125 and 1400W attenuated the protective effect without affecting IS in the non-ATV-treated rats. ATV increased calcium-independent NOS (iNOS) [11.9 (SD 0.8) vs. 3.9 (SD 0.1) × 1,000 counts/min; P < 0.001] and COX-2 [46.7 (SD 1.1) vs. 6.5 (SD 1.4) pg/ml of 6-keto-PGF1α; P < 0.001] activity. Both SC-58125 and 1400W attenuated this increase. SC-58125 did not affect iNOS activity, whereas 1400W blocked iNOS activity. COX-2 was S-nitrosylated in ATV-treated but not sham-treated rats or rats pretreated with 1400W. COX-2 immunoprecipitated with iNOS but not with endothelial nitric oxide synthase. We conclude that ATV reduced IS by increasing the activity of iNOS and COX-2, iNOS is upstream to COX-2, and iNOS activates COX-2 by S-nitrosylation. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that preconditioning effects are mediated via PG.

Pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin and its hydroxy metabolites in rats and the effects of concomitant rifampicin single doses: relevance of first-pass effect from hepatic uptake transporters, and intestinal and hepatic metabolism

Pharmacokinetic coadministration experiments with atorvastatin (ATV) and rifampicin (RIF) in rats were performed to investigate the potential involvement of hepatic uptake transporters, Oatps (organic anion-transporting polypeptides), during hepatic drug elimination, as an in vivo extension of our recently published cellular and isolated perfused liver studies. ATV was administered orally (10 mg/kg) and intravenously (2 mg/kg) to rats in the absence and presence of a single intravenous dose of RIF (20 mg/kg), and pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between control and RIF-treatment groups. RIF markedly increased the plasma concentrations of ATV and its metabolites when ATV was administered orally. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0-infinity)) for ATV also increased significantly after intravenous dosing of ATV with RIF, but the extent was much less than that observed for oral ATV dosing. Significant increases in plasma levels were observed for both metabolites as well. The 7-fold higher AUC ratio of metabolites to parent drug following oral versus intravenous ATV dosing suggests that ATV undergoes extensive gut metabolism. Both hepatic and intestinal metabolism contribute to the low oral bioavailability of ATV in rats. In the presence of RIF, the liver metabolic extraction was significantly reduced, most likely because of RIF's inhibition on Oatp-mediated uptake, which leads to reduced hepatic amounts of parent drug for subsequent metabolism. Gut extraction was also significantly reduced, but we were unable to elucidate the mechanism of this effect because intravenous RIF caused gut changes in availability. These studies reinforce our hypothesis that hepatic uptake is a major contributor to the elimination of ATV and its metabolites in vivo.

The logistic transform for bounded outcome scores

The logistic transformation, originally suggested by Johnson (1949), is applied to analyze responses that are restricted to a finite interval (e.g. (0,1)), so-called bounded outcome scores. Bounded outcome scores often have a non-standard distribution, e.g. J- or U-shaped, precluding classical parametric statistical approaches for analysis. Applying the logistic transformation on a normally distributed random variable, gives rise to a logit-normal (LN) distribution. This distribution can take a variety of shapes on (0,1). Further, the model can be extended to correct for (baseline) covariates. Therefore, the method could be useful for comparative clinical trials. Bounded outcomes can be found in many research areas, e.g. drug compliance research, quality-of-life studies, and pain (and pain relief) studies using visual analog scores, but all these scores can attain the boundary values 0 or 1. A natural extension of the above approach is therefore to assume a latent score on 0,1) having a LN distribution. Two cases are considered: (a) the bounded outcome score is a proportion where the true probabilities have a LN distribution on (0,1) and (b) the bounded outcome score on [0,1] is a coarsened version of a latent score with a LN distribution on (0,1). We also allow the variance (on the transformed scale) to depend on treatment. The usefulness of our approach for comparative clinical trials will be assessed in this paper. It turns out to be important to distinguish the case of equal and unequal variances. For a bounded outcome score of the second type and with equal variances, our approach comes close to ordinal probit (OP) regression. However, ignoring the inequality of variances can lead to highly biased parameter estimates. A simulation study compares the performance of our approach with the two-sample Wilcoxon test and with OP regression. Finally, the different methods are illustrated on two data sets.

Early effects on endothelial function of atorvastatin 40 mg twice daily and its withdrawal

Combined hyperlipidemia is associated with endothelial dysfunction. Atorvastatin has lipid-lowering and pleiotropic properties, including a protective effect on endothelial function. This study investigated the short- and medium-term effects of therapy with atorvastatin and of its discontinuation on lipid lowering and endothelial function. In 33 patients with combined hyperlipidemia who had been randomized and treated for 6 weeks with 40 mg of atorvastatin twice daily (n = 23) or placebo (n = 10), fasting lipid levels and flow-mediated dilation (FMD) of the brachial artery were measured at baseline, after 12 hours, 1 week, and 6 weeks during therapy, and 36 hours after discontinuation of therapy. Thereafter, all patients received 20 mg/day of atorvastatin for another 6 weeks. In the atorvastatin group, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was decreased by 30% and 46% after 1 and 6 weeks, respectively (p <0.0001 for the 2 comparisons). In patients who already showed an impaired FMD at the beginning of the study (n = 15), atorvastatin caused a significant improvement in FMD, from 2.6% at baseline to 4.0% and 6.3% after 1 and 6 weeks, respectively (p <0.05 and <0.001). Thirty-six hours after withdrawal of atorvastatin, the FMD in this group decreased again to 2.8% (p <0.05), whereas low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level remained unchanged. The 6 patients with normal FMD at baseline showed no improvement in FMD during therapy or any decrease after withdrawal of the drug. In conclusion, only patients with endothelial dysfunction profit from high-dose atorvastatin treatment. When the treatment is abruptly discontinued, the effect on FMD disappears in 36 hours.

A Tale of Two Trials

Background— The Aggrastat to Zocor (A to Z) and Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy (PROVE IT) trials compared intensive and moderate statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes, with seemingly disparate results. We analyzed the design, implementation, and results of the two trials in an attempt to clarify the effects of early intensive statin therapy.

Methods and Results— Study design, end points, and definitions were compared. In each trial, comparisons were made between intensive and moderate arms for both trials’ primary end points and death/myocardial infarction. Analyses were performed over various time points: at the end of the trials, ≤4 months, and >4 months. Subjects in A to Z had higher-risk demographics. More PROVE IT subjects were enrolled in the United States and underwent prerandomization revascularization. The low-density lipoprotein (LDL) difference was greater in A to Z than in PROVE IT early (≤4 months) but less late. Significant C-reactive protein reduction was earlier in PROVE IT. With common end points, event rates were higher in A to Z, and early favorable separation of event curves was seen in PROVE IT but not in A to Z. Clinical end point rates and reductions were similar in both trials after 4 months.

Conclusions— An early benefit was seen in PROVE IT but not in A to Z. Late-phase results were similar. Factors that may explain this disparity include the intensity of therapy in the early phase, timing, and magnitude of LDL and C-reactive protein lowering, differences in early revascularization, and the play of chance. Taken together, the results of these trials support a strategy of early intensive statin therapy coupled with revascularization when appropriate in patients after acute coronary syndrome.

Correlation Between Inflammation and Oxidative Stress in Normocholesterolemic Coronary Artery Disease Patients ‘on’ and ‘off’ Atorvastatin for Short Time Intervals

AIM OF THE STUDY

To assess whether variations in antioxidant and anti-inflammatory parameters occur with short term administration and discontinuation of atorvastatin in normocholesterolemic coronary artery disease (CAD) patients.

METHODS

Forty CAD patients with near normal serum cholesterol levels (total cholesterol <240 mg/dl, LDL cholesterol <130 mg/dl) were continuously enrolled and randomized to groups A and B (20 patients taking atorvastatin) and groups C and D (20 patients not taking atorvastatin). Atorvastatin (10 mg/day) was continued in group A, withdrawn in group B and started in groups C and D for 6 weeks. Thereafter atorvastatin was withdrawn in group A and C, restarted in group B, and continued in group D for further 6 weeks. CRP, FRAP and TBARS were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks and 12 weeks in all the groups.

RESULTS

Baseline CRP, TBARS and FRAP levels were significantly different (p < 0.05) between groups A and B and C and D at the time of enrollment, indicating lower levels of oxidative stress (FRAP-172.40 +/- 23.41 nmol Fe(2+)/l vs 142.62 +/- 15.73 nmol Fe(2+)/l and TBARS-3.66 +/- 1.14 nmol/ml vs 6.11 +/- 1.85 nmol/ml) and low grade inflammation (CRP-1.38 +/- 0.69 mg/l vs 3.19 +/- 1.77 mg/l) in statin treated groups. In group B, discontinuation resulted in increase in CRP (2.87 +/- 0.98 mg/l) and TBARS (5.75 +/- 1.35 nmol/ml) and decrease in FRAP (133.132 +/- 13.32 nmol Fe(2+)/l) and whereas group A patients did not show significant variation in values compared to baseline (CRP-1.36 +/- 0.33 mg/l, FRAP-155.45 +/- 19.51 and TBARS-4.22 +/- 0.81). Administration of atorvastatin caused a marked reduction in oxidative stress and inflammation in groups C and D (CRP-1.13 +/- 0.99 mg/l and 1.73 +/- 1.60 mg/l, FRAP-166.54 +/- 34.11 and 177.44 +/- 13.31 nmol Fe(2+)/l, TBARS-4.66 +/- 2.33 and 3.55 +/- 1.25 nmol/ml respectively). The values returned to pretreatment levels on discontinuation of the drug in group C (CRP-2.61 +/- 1.28 mg/l, FRAP-138.49 +/- 19.62 nmol Fe(2+)/l, TBARS-6.13 +/- 0.74 nmol/ml) whereas the decline was maintained in group D (CRP-1.62 +/- 1.48 mg/l, FRAP-173.07 +/- 9.03 nmol Fe(2+)/l, TBARS-3.75 +/- 1.03 nmol/ml).

CONCLUSION

Administration and withdrawal of atorvastatin caused changes in markers of oxidative stress which closely correlated with changes in marker of inflammation. Further, the salutary effects were of quick onset, but were rapidly reversed on withdrawal of atorvastatin.

Cholesterol, copper and Abeta in controls, MCI, AD and the AD cholesterol-lowering treatment trial (ADCLT)

Cholesterol clearly plays an influential role in promoting the production of amyloid beta (Abeta) and possibly the progression of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). The AD Cholesterol-Lowering Treatment trial (ADCLT; 1 year duration) tested atorvastatin and found significant benefit on measures of cognition and depressive symptoms in treated patients (N = 32) compared to placebo (N = 31). We assessed the circulating levels of Abeta(1-40), Abeta(1-42), ceruloplasmin (copper chaperone), apolipoprotein E and HDL-cholesterol in blood collected at each clinical visit during the ADCLT. We also determined the circulating cholesterol, ceruloplasmin, and Abeta levels in AD and MCI (mild cognitive impairment) patients, and controls (two groups stratified by function; high and low) participating in our Brain Bank Program. Each Brain Bank individual was clinically assessed for performance on the Mini-Mental Status Exam (MMSE), Rey auditory verbal learning test (AVLT), Clock draw, and UPSIT (smell identification test). Among individuals of equal age and education, scores on the MMSE were significantly reduced in AD compared to both MCI and controls, as were scores on the UPSIT. Ability on delayed verbal recall was significantly reduced in AD compared to MCI, and in MCI compared to both control groups. Performance on the Clock draw was similar for AD and MCI patients, but was significantly reduced when comparing MCI to control. Both cholesterol and ceruloplasmin levels were significantly increased in low-function controls compared to the high-function control group, but were not different from levels identified in the MCI and AD patients. Significantly increased levels of Abeta(1-40) occurred in low- compared to high-function controls, with a further significant increase in MCI compared to low-function controls. Circulating Abeta(1-40) levels were decreased in AD compared to MCI. Levels of Abeta(1-42) were not significantly different between the groups. The slight gradual increase in circulating Abeta(1-40) and Abeta(1-42) levels produced by atorvastatin treatment in the ADCLT were not significant compared placebo. There was a trend for significant reduction in circulating ceruloplasmin levels after a year of atorvastatin therapy compared to levels observed at screen. The levels of HDL-cholesterol remained stable in the atorvastatin treated AD patients for 9 months and then decreased significantly compared to the placebo group at the 1-year time-point. The combined data support a role for cholesterol in AD and a possible influence of increasing circulating copper levels. The deterioration of function in controls and transition to MCI may be associated with concomitant incremental increases in circulating Abeta(1-40) levels. Increased cholesterol and ceruloplasmin levels may be associated with slight deterioration in function among controls as a precursor to impairment considered MCI. The clinical benefit of atorvastatin therapy is clearly not associated with decreased circulating Abeta or increased HDL-cholesterol, but a positive influence of reduced copper (ceruloplasmin) levels may be a consideration.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH—ED PHARMACOTHERAPY: Can Atorvastatin Improve the Response to Sildenafil in Men with Erectile Dysfunction Not Initially Responsive to Sildenafil? Hypothesis and Pilot Trial Results

BACKGROUND

Erectile dysfunction (ED) may be one manifestation of a generalized vascular disorder characterized by endothelial dysfunction. Statin drugs may improve endothelial function, even before altering the lipid profile.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether the addition of a statin with sildenafil would improve ED in men who initially responded poorly to sildenafil.

METHODS

Men with moderate-to-severe ED despite an adequate sildenafil trial were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study. ED was defined using a validated self-administered questionnaire as a score of <or=16 on the International Index of Erectile Function (erectile function domain score range of 6-30). Improvement in ED score with sildenafil was reassessed at 6 and 12 weeks of treatment with atorvastatin (80 mg daily) or matching placebo.

RESULTS

Twelve men (mean age 58 +/- 13 years) with a mean domain score of 8.2 +/- 6.9 and a mean duration of ED of 3.7 years were enrolled in the study. Treatment with atorvastatin decreased mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 43% and resulted in an improvement with sildenafil in domain score of 7.8 (P = 0.036); an effect was apparent by 6 weeks. The increase in domain score in placebo patients was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with atorvastatin improved sexual function and the response to oral sildenafil in men who did not initially respond to treatment with sildenafil. The results of this pilot study support the hypothesis that vascular endothelial dysfunction contributes to ED in sildenafil nonresponders and deserves further testing in a large clinical trial.

The effect of atorvastatin treatment on HIV-1-infected patients interrupting antiretroviral therapy

We conducted a pilot study to assess the effect of atorvastatin on HIV replication. Patients with stable HAART-controlled infection interrupted therapy and were randomly assigned to a control group or to start atorvastatin 40 or 80 mg/day. Statin groups showed lower serum cholesterol but similar viral loads and CD4 T-cell counts to the control group at weeks 4 and 12. Paradoxically, baseline serum cholesterol, but not atorvastatin, influenced viral rebound at week 4.

Effects of atorvastatin on higher functions

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to assess the effects of atorvastatin on cognition and higher mental functions.

METHODS

In this before and after comparison study with controls, group one included 55 subjects aged > or =40 years requiring statins for cardiovascular indications who were started on atorvastatin (10 mg/day). Group two assigned to receive placebo were men and women chosen from the same geographical area and matched for age, sex, education and presence of hypertension and diabetes mellitus. Assessment was done with the Mini-Mental State Examination, Digit Span, Picture Test (average and delayed), Trail Making Test, Controlled Oral Word Association Test, Digit Symbol Substitution Test and Auditory Vigilance and Digit Vigilance Test at baseline and after 6 months. Changes between baseline and 6 months in the above parameters of mental function were compared using suitable statistical tests in the atorvastatin and placebo groups. To limit experiment-wise error, performance scores were grouped into five cognitive domains, which were labeled as attention, psychomotor speed, mental flexibility, working memory and memory retrieval. Summary effect sizes were estimated as z-scores.

RESULTS

Both subjects on atorvastatin and placebo showed improvement in the majority of scales consistent with a learning effect on test performance. However, subjects treated with atorvastatin scored significantly over the placebo group in all domains, i.e. tests of attention [z-score=0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-0.64, p=0.001], psychomotor speed (z-score=0.28, 95% CI: O.09-0.47, p<0.001), mental flexibility (z-score=0.27, 95% CI: 0.22-0.32, p=0.01), working memory (z-score=1.22, 95% CI: 0.93-1.50, p<0.001) and memory retrieval (z-score=0.59, 95% CI: 0.36-0.82, p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The present study concludes that there are significant beneficial effects of atorvastatin in a dose of 10 mg/day for a period of 6 months on higher functions as measured by the above standard neurocognitive tests.

Isoprenoids determine Th1/Th2 fate in pathogenic T cells, providing a mechanism of modulation of autoimmunity by atorvastatin

3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl–coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase is a critical enzyme in the mevalonate pathway that regulates the biosynthesis of cholesterol as well as isoprenoids that mediate the membrane association of certain GTPases. Blockade of this enzyme by atorvastatin (AT) inhibits the destructive proinflammatory T helper cell (Th)1 response during experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis and may be beneficial in the treatment of multiple sclerosis and other Th1-mediated autoimmune diseases. Here we present evidence linking specific isoprenoid intermediates of the mevalonate pathway to signaling pathways that regulate T cell autoimmunity. We demonstrate that the isoprenoid geranylgeranyl-pyrophosphate (GGPP) mediates proliferation, whereas both GGPP and its precursor, farnesyl-PP, regulate the Th1 differentiation of myelin-reactive T cells. Depletion of these isoprenoid intermediates in vivo via oral AT administration hindered these T cell responses by decreasing geranylgeranylated RhoA and farnesylated Ras at the plasma membrane. This was associated with reduced extracellular signal–regulated kinase (ERK) and p38 phosphorylation and DNA binding of their cotarget c-fos in response to T cell receptor activation. Inhibition of ERK and p38 mimicked the effects of AT and induced a Th2 cytokine shift. Thus, by connecting isoprenoid availability to regulation of Th1/Th2 fate, we have elucidated a mechanism by which AT may suppress Th1-mediated central nervous system autoimmune disease.

Are statins created equal? Evidence from randomized trials of pravastatin, simvastatin, and atorvastatin for cardiovascular disease prevention

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy of different statins for long-term cardiovascular prevention remains largely undetermined.

METHODS

Using adjusted indirect comparison, we compared 3 statins (pravastatin, simvastatin, and atorvastatin) based on published randomized placebo-controlled trials for long-term cardiovascular prevention. A systematic literature search between 1980 and 2004 was conducted. Randomized placebo-controlled trials of the 3 statins, which studied cardiovascular diseases or death as the outcome, enrolled > or = 1000 participants, and had > or = 1-year follow-up, were included. Trials were grouped according to the statin under study. A pooled relative risk (RR) was derived from each set of trials using a random-effects model. Adjusted indirect comparisons using pooled RRs were made between statins with regard to prespecified clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Eight placebo-controlled trials met the inclusion criteria, including 4 pravastatin trials (n = 25,572), 2 simvastatin trials (n = 24,980), and 2 atorvastatin trials (n = 13,143). All trials had a similar degree of lipid reduction. Graphical and statistical assessments showed minimal heterogeneity in the trials' effect sizes. Adjusted indirect comparisons did not reveal a statistically significant difference between statins in reducing fatal coronary heart disease and nonfatal myocardial infarctions (simvastatin vs pravastatin: RR 0.93 [95% CI 0.84-1.03]; atorvastatin vs simvastatin: RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.66-1.08]; atorvastatin vs pravastatin: RR 0.79 [95% CI 0.61-1.02]). We were unable to detect differences either in outcomes for fatal and nonfatal strokes, all cardiovascular deaths, and all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from published statin randomized placebo-controlled trials suggests that pravastatin, simvastatin, and atorvastatin, when used at their standard dosages, show no statistically significant difference in their effect on long-term cardiovascular prevention.

Prescription des statines en cas d’insuffisance rénale

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is extremely common in adults, although often undiagnosed and thus untreated. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death among patients with CKD and reducing its risk in this population is an important priority. Dyslipidemia is almost always present when proteinuria is above 3 gr/24 hours. Roughly two thirds of all patients with end-stage renal failure and kidney transplants suffer from dyslipidemia and should receive lipid-lowering therapy, as suggested by recent Afssaps (French drug agency) and NKF-K/DOQI (National Kidney Foundation-Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative) guidelines. We reviewed recent studies on efficacy, tolerability and prescription recommendations of statins in CKD and renal transplant patients.

METHODS

We searched Medline, the international medical database, to conduct a systematic review of the literature on the efficacy and tolerability of statins in CKD and renal transplant patients and on specific recommendations for dosage adjustments in this population.

RESULTS

The efficacy of statins in decreasing total cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol levels in dialysis and renal transplant patients is similar to that in the general population. On the other hand, large-scale randomized clinical trials among CKD (4D) and renal transplant (ALERT) patients do not demonstrate that statins significantly decrease rates of cardiovascular disease. They have a beneficial effect on proteinuria and lower the rate of kidney function deterioration in patients with dyslipidemia. Early introduction of a statin in transplant patients did not lead to improved kidney function or prevent loss of the graft. Although most statins are not excreted by the kidneys, the dosage of some must be adapted in CKD patients because of pharmacokinetic modifications induced by renal impairment.

CONCLUSION

Statins at appropriately adapted doses have the same efficacy in CKD patients as in subjects with normal kidney function, and tolerance is not a problem. Their effectiveness in cardiovascular prevention in this population has not been demonstrated to date. Results about statin-induced kidney protection are encouraging but further and more specific studies are needed.