Effects of torcetrapib in patients at high risk for coronary events

BACKGROUND

Inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) has been shown to have a substantial effect on plasma lipoprotein levels. We investigated whether torcetrapib, a potent CETP inhibitor, might reduce major cardiovascular events. The trial was terminated prematurely because of an increased risk of death and cardiac events in patients receiving torcetrapib.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind study involving 15,067 patients at high cardiovascular risk. The patients received either torcetrapib plus atorvastatin or atorvastatin alone. The primary outcome was the time to the first major cardiovascular event, which was defined as death from coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina.

RESULTS

At 12 months in patients who received torcetrapib, there was an increase of 72.1% in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and a decrease of 24.9% in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, as compared with baseline (P<0.001 for both comparisons), in addition to an increase of 5.4 mm Hg in systolic blood pressure, a decrease in serum potassium, and increases in serum sodium, bicarbonate, and aldosterone (P<0.001 for all comparisons). There was also an increased risk of cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.44; P=0.001) and death from any cause (hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.19; P=0.006). Post hoc analyses showed an increased risk of death in patients treated with torcetrapib whose reduction in potassium or increase in bicarbonate was greater than the median change.

CONCLUSIONS

Torcetrapib therapy resulted in an increased risk of mortality and morbidity of unknown mechanism. Although there was evidence of an off-target effect of torcetrapib, we cannot rule out adverse effects related to CETP inhibition. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00134264 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

CYP2D6*4 polymorphism is associated with statin-induced muscle effects

Statin use is associated with a variety of overtly related muscle symptoms including muscle pain, myalgia, creatine kinase elevations without pain with myolysis and myositis (rhabdomyolysis), a potentially fatal side effect that led to the withdrawal of cerivastatin in 2001. Unintended drug response phenotypes have an impact on patient compliance and sometimes patient health and the assessment of risk on an individual basis could enhance therapeutic benefit. We therefore investigated whether common single nucleotide polymorphisms were associated with the expression of broadly grouped atorvastatin-induced muscle events in a case-control study (n=263 samples, n=388 SNPs). Of a number of associations identified in a discovery sample (51 atorvastatin-induced muscle and 55 normal) only those corresponding to the CYP2D6*4 allele were significantly associated in the sample (24 atorvastatin-induced muscle and 133 normal) (Discovery P=0.004, odds ratio=3.6; Validation P=0.036, odds ratio=2.7; total P=0.001, odds ratio=2.5). The frequency of the CYP2D6*4 allele was about 50% in atorvastatin-induced muscle patients but only 28% in controls, similar to that of other patient types (28.5%). The association was independent of various demographic variables and not explained by gross demographic, clinical or population-structure differences among cases and controls. Surprisingly, the CYP2D6*4 allele appeared similarly distributed among controls and patients expressing simvastatin-induced muscle events (n=169, frequency in case participants=49.2%, P=0.067, odds ratio=1.7). Our results suggest that the CYP2D6*4 allele is associated with broadly related muscle events caused by at least two structurally dissimilar HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, and as such, may have implications for a better understanding of this statin-wide phenomena.

Discontinuation of Statin Therapy and Clinical Outcome After Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose— The majority of patients with previous ischemic stroke are expected to benefit significantly from long-term statin therapy. However, discontinuation of medication therapy frequently occurs in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of discontinued statin therapy on clinical outcome in patients discharged after an acute ischemic stroke.

Methods— The study population included 631 consecutive stroke survivors (322 men and 309 women; mean±SD age, 70.2±7.6 years) without clinical evidence of coronary heart disease. All patients were discharged on statin therapy and were followed up for 12 months after the acute ischemic stroke.

Results— Within 12 months from discharge, 246 patients (38.9%) discontinued statin therapy; the mean time from discharge to statin discontinuation was 48.6±54.9 days (median time, 30 days; interquartile range, 18 to 55 days). During follow-up, 116 patients died (1-year probability of death=0.18; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.21). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that after adjustment for all confounders and interactions, statin therapy discontinuation (hazard ratio=2.78; 95% CI, 1.96 to 3.72; P =0.003) was an independent predictor of all-cause 1-year mortality.

Conclusions— A large number of patients discontinue their use of statins early after acute stroke. Moreover, patients discontinuing statins have a significantly increased mortality during the first year after the acute cerebrovascular event. These findings suggest that patient care should be improved during the transition from a hospital setting to outpatient primary care.

Safety and efficacy of Atorvastatin-induced very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in Patients with coronary heart disease (a post hoc analysis of the treating to new targets [TNT] study)

High-dose statin therapy has been demonstrated to provide incremental benefit when low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol concentrations are lowered well below recommended target levels. This secondary analysis of the Treating to New Targets (TNT) study was conducted to investigate whether the attainment of very low LDL cholesterol levels was associated with a further reduction in major cardiovascular events compared with higher LDL cholesterol concentrations and whether any incremental benefit was achieved without additional safety risk. Patients with coronary heart disease and LDL cholesterol levels <130 mg/dl (3.4 mmol/L) were randomized to therapy with atorvastatin 10 mg/day (n = 5,006) or 80 mg/day (n = 4,995). The primary end point was the occurrence of a first major cardiovascular event. Clinical outcomes and safety data were compared across on-treatment LDL cholesterol quintiles. There was a highly significant reduction in the rate of major cardiovascular events with descending achieved levels of on-treatment LDL cholesterol (p <0.0001 for trend across LDL cholesterol). Analysis of individual components of the primary end point demonstrated similar results. Death from any cause and from noncardiovascular causes was lowest in patients with the lowest on-treatment LDL cholesterol levels. Cardiovascular deaths were also reduced with lower levels of on-treatment LDL cholesterol. There were no clinically important differences in adverse event rates across quintiles. Specifically, no increase in muscle complaints, suicide, hemorrhagic stroke, or cancer deaths was observed at the lowest LDL cholesterol levels. In conclusion, the present analysis adds support to the concept that for patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, a further risk reduction without sacrifice of safety can be achieved by reducing LDL cholesterol to very low levels.

A dose-specific meta-analysis of lipid changes in randomized controlled trials of atorvastatin and simvastatin

BACKGROUND

The available statins exhibit differences in the potency with which they alter serum lipid levels.

OBJECTIVE

Meta-analyses were conducted to assess the relative potency of atorvastatin and simvastatin (the 2 most commonly prescribed statins) across all possible dose combinations in terms of changes in total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), triglycerides (TG), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, National Health Service (NHS) Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for randomized, head-to-head trials of atorvastatin and simvastatin in patients aged >or=18 years with elevated levels of serum TC and LDL-C. Reference lists of the identified articles, letters, and editorials also were reviewed. The manufacturers of atorvastatin and simvastatin products were contacted for relevant unpublished data. All studies were reviewed and rated for quality by 2 independent reviewers. The maximum quality score was 4 points; trials with a score of <2 points were considered to be of poor quality and were excluded from analysis. Dose comparisons were abstracted in pairs from each trial. Meta-analyses were conducted on the fixed-dose pairs for each lipid parameter. Weighted mean differences in the change in TC, LDL-C, TG, and HDL-C were estimated using the Der Simonian and Laird random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seventeen published trials and 1 unpublished study were included in the meta-analyses. Atorvastatin treatment was associated with significantly greater reductions in TC, LDL-C, and TG in the majority of dose comparisons with simvastatin. The potency of atorvastatin and simvastatin was comparable at dose ratios between 1:2 and 1:4. Higher doses of simvastatin were more effective in increasing HDL-C levels than atorvastatin, with no apparent dose-equivalence point. The HDL-C advantage of simvastatin was greatest when simvastatin 80 mg was compared with atorvastatin 80 mg (weighted mean difference, -4.35%; 95% CI, -5.64 to -3.08, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In these meta-analyses, atorvastatin was 2 to 4 times as potent as simvastatin in reducing TC, LDL-C, and TG, indicating that the dose equivalence of atorvastatin and simvastatin lay between 1:2 and 1:4. In contrast, simvastatin was more effective than atorvastatin in increasing HDL-C, but without any indication of a point of dose equivalence.

Torcetrapib and carotid intima-media thickness in mixed dyslipidaemia (RADIANCE 2 study): a randomised, double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with mixed dyslipidaemia have raised triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and high low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. Augmentation of HDL cholesterol by inhibition of the cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) could benefit these patients. We aimed to investigate the effect of the CETP inhibitor, torcetrapib, on carotid atherosclerosis progression in patients with mixed dyslipidaemia.

METHODS

We did a randomised double-blind trial at 64 centres in North America and Europe. 752 eligible participants completed an atorvastatin-only run-in period for dose titration, after which they all continued to receive atorvastatin at the titrated dose. 377 of these patients were randomly assigned to receive 60 mg of torcetrapib per day and 375 to placebo. We made carotid ultrasound images at baseline and at 6-month intervals for 24 months. The primary endpoint was the yearly rate of change in the maximum intima-media thickness of 12 carotid segments. Analysis was restricted to 683 patients who had at least one dose of treatment and had at least one follow-up carotid intima-media measurement; they were analysed as randomised. Mean follow-up for these patients was 22 (SD 4.8) months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00134238.

FINDINGS

The change in maximum carotid intima-media thickness was 0.025 (SD 0.005) mm per year in patients given torcetrapib with atorvastatin and 0.030 (0.005) mm per year in those given atorvastatin alone (difference -0.005 mm per year, 95% CI -0.018 to 0.008, p=0.46). Patients in the combined-treatment group had a 63.4% relative increase in HDL cholesterol (p<0.0001) and an 17.7% relative decrease in LDL cholesterol (p<0.0001), compared with controls. Systolic blood pressure increased by 6.6 mm Hg in the combined-treatment group and 1.5 mm Hg in the atorvastatin-only group (difference 5.4 mm Hg, 95% CI 4.3-6.4, p<0.0001).

INTERPRETATION

Although torcetrapib substantially raised HDL cholesterol and lowered LDL cholesterol, it also increased systolic blood pressure, and did not affect the yearly rate of change in the maximum intima-media thickness of 12 carotid segments. Torcetrapib showed no clinical benefit in this or other studies, and will not be developed further.

Lack of evidence of a clopidogrel-statin interaction in the CHARISMA trial

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the potential impact of clopidogrel and statin interaction in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND

There are conflicting data regarding whether statins predominantly metabolized by CYP3A4 reduce the metabolism of clopidogrel to its active metabolite and diminish its clinical efficacy.

METHODS

The CHARISMA trial was a randomized trial comparing long-term 75 mg/day clopidogrel versus placebo in patients with cardiovascular disease or multiple risk factors on aspirin. The primary end point was a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death at median follow-up of 28 months. We performed a secondary analysis evaluating the interaction of clopidogrel versus placebo with statin administration, categorizing baseline statin use to those predominantly CYP3A4 metabolized (atorvastatin, lovastatin, simvastatin; CYP3A4-MET) or others (pravastatin, fluvastatin; non-CYP3A4-MET).

RESULTS

Of 15,603 patients enrolled, 10,078 received a statin at baseline (8,245 CYP3A4-MET, 1,748 non-CYP3A4-MET) and 5,496 did not. For the overall population, the primary end point was 6.8% with clopidogrel and 7.3% with placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.93; p = 0.22). This was similar among patients on CYP3A4-MET (5.9% clopidogrel, 6.6% placebo, HR 0.89; p = 0.18) or non-CYP3A4-MET statin (5.7% clopidogrel, 7.2% placebo, HR 0.78; p = 0.19). There was no interaction between statin types and randomized treatment (p = 0.69). Patients on atorvastatin (n = 4,127) (5.7% clopidogrel, 7.1% placebo, HR 0.80; p = 0.06) or pravastatin (n = 1,440) (5.1% clopidogrel, 7.0% placebo, HR 0.72; p = 0.13) had similar event rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite theoretic concerns and ex vivo testing suggesting a potential negative interaction with concomitant clopidogrel and CYP3A4-MET statin administration, there was no evidence of an interaction clinically in a large placebo-controlled trial with long-term follow-up.

Effect of atorvastatin on energy expenditure and skeletal muscle oxidative metabolism at rest and during exercise

Statins are associated with adverse effects in skeletal muscle. This study tested the hypothesis that atorvastatin would increase the respiratory exchange ratio (RER) at rest and during exercise. Twenty-eight healthy subjects (mean age 52 years) were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study of the effects of atorvastatin (40 mg/day) on whole body energetics over 8 weeks. Ventilatory gas exchange measurements, at rest and during bicycle ergometry, were used to assess muscle oxidative metabolism. Thirteen subjects from each treatment arm completed the study. Eight weeks of atorvastatin lowered plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration but had no effect on resting or submaximal energy expenditure, RER, or calculated fatty acid oxidation rates. Atorvastatin did not affect maximal exercise oxygen consumption or the anaerobic threshold. Eight weeks of atorvastatin therapy was not associated with alterations in substrate oxidation, or muscle oxidative function at rest, or during exercise in healthy adults.

Comparison of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin in South-Asian patients at risk of coronary heart disease (from the IRIS Trial)

In a large randomized trial of statin therapy in patients of South-Asian origin with hypercholesterolemia, 740 patients in the United States and Canada received 6 weeks of treatment with rosuvastatin 10 or 20 mg or atorvastatin 10 or 20 mg. A total of 485 patients (66%) were categorized as being at high risk of coronary heart disease and had a National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III treatment goal of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol <100 mg/dl (<2.6 mmol/L). LDL cholesterol decreased by 45% with rosuvastatin 10 mg versus 40% with atorvastatin 10 mg (p = 0.0023) and by 50% with rosuvastatin 20 mg versus 47% with atorvastatin 20 mg (p = NS). National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III LDL cholesterol goal achievement rates in high-risk patients (all patients) were 76% (79%) and 88% (89%) with rosuvastatin 10 and 20 mg, respectively, compared with 70% (76%) and 81% (85%) with atorvastatin 10 and 20 mg, respectively. Rosuvastatin and atorvastatin were well tolerated. There were no clinically relevant differences between statins in adverse events or incidence of creatine kinase >10 times the upper limit of normal, alanine aminotransferase >3 times the upper limit of normal on 2 consecutive occasions, or proteinuria or hematuria over the relatively short duration of treatment. In conclusion, statin therapy was well tolerated and effective in decreasing LDL cholesterol in patients of South-Asian origin, with the 10- and 20-mg doses of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin allowing most patients to reach recommended LDL cholesterol goals.

Single‐Pill Therapy in the Treatment of Concomitant Hypertension and Dyslipidemia (The Amlodipine/Atorvastatin Gemini Study)

The Gemini Study was a 14-week, open-label, non-comparative, office-based, multicenter trial to evaluate single-pill therapy in the treatment of concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia. In addition to recommending lifestyle modifications, eight dosage strengths of amlodipine/atorvastatin single pill (5/10, 5/20, 5/40, 5/80, 10/10, 10/20, 10/40, and 10/80 mg) were electively titrated to improve blood pressure and lipid control. A total of 1220 patients with uncontrolled hypertension at baseline received study medication. At baseline, mean blood pressure was 146.6/87.9 mm Hg and mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration was 152.9 mg/dL. At study end, 57.7% of patients had achieved both their blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals (51.9% of patients with uncontrolled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol at baseline). The mean dose of study medication at end point was amlodipine component 7.1 mg and atorvastatin component 26.2 mg. Fifty-eight patients (4.8%) discontinued therapy due to adverse events. Single-pill therapy is effective in reducing both blood pressure and lipid levels and in helping patients achieve goals for both hypertension and dyslipidemia.

Atorvastatin-induced early-onset rhabdomyolysis in a patient with nephrotic syndrome

PURPOSE

A case of early-onset rhabdomyolysis in a patient treated with atorvastatin is described.

SUMMARY

A 17-year-old Indian boy weighing 55 kg was admitted to the hospital after complaining of facial puffiness and pedal edema for four days. His medical history revealed a diagnosis of nephrotic syndrome when he was 2 years old. He had six relapses, the last of which occurred 10 years ago. He was not taking any medications on admission and had not for the past 9 years. His vital signs were normal on admission (day 1), but anasarca was noticed during general examination. Cardiovascular, respiratory, and abdominal examinations were normal. Relapse of nephrotic syndrome was considered, and his 24-hour urine protein value confirmed the diagnosis. Further laboratory tests revealed that the patient had high total and low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol values (597 and 465 mg/dL, respectively), and atorvastatin 10 mg p.o. once daily was initiated on day 2. Prednisolone 60 mg p.o. once daily was initiated on day 3. On day 6, the patient complained of pain in both thighs and had difficulty walking. His creatine kinase (CK) concentration was then measured and found to be elevated (11,821 IU/L). Prednisolone and atorvastatin were then stopped, as statin-induced myopathy was suspected. The patient received i.v. hydration and sodium bicarbonate, and he began to show improvement by day 9. Follow-up three weeks later revealed a normal CK level and no myopathy-related complaints.

CONCLUSION

Early-onset rhabdomyolysis was reported in a patient with nephrotic syndrome who was treated with atorvastatin. Concomitant use of prednisolone and the patient's underlying renal impairment may have predisposed the patient to this adverse reaction.

Effect of atorvastatin on type 2 diabetic dyslipidemia

Hyperlipidemia is commonly observed in patients with type 2 diabetes and is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The authors tested the effect of atorvastatin (10 mg/d) on 110 hyperlipidemic type 2 diabetes patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels exceeding 130 mg/d. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage change in LDL-C and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and secondary efficacy included the percentage change in apolipoproteins at weeks 6, 12, and 24. The tertiary goal was percentage change in free radical scavenger enzymes and oxidative stress. LDL-C was reduced by 25%, 39.3%, and 49.2%. A similar trend was observed in total cholesterol, triglyceride, non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein (apo) B-100. HDL-C was raised by 3.2%, 6%, and 8.2%. A similar trend was seen in apo A-1. Copper zinc-superoxide dismutase and glutathione were raised significantly (P < .001); however, changes in glutathione-S-transferase and glutathione peroxidase activities were nonsignificant. Malondialdehyde was decreased significantly (P < .001). Atorvastatin improves the lipoprotein profile and oxidative status in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Randomised study to compare the efficacy and safety of isapgol plus atorvastatin versus atorvastatin alone in subjects with hypercholesterolaemia

Soluble fibre has been shown to augment the cholesterol-lowering effects of low-fat diets in individuals with mild to moderate hypercholesterolaemia. Combination therapy with a statin poses advantages in certain settings and may allow use of lower doses of multiple drugs rather than maximum doses of a single drug. The primary objective of the study was to compare the efficacy of combination of isapgol and atorvastatin versus atorvastatin alone, in the same dose, in reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total-cholesterol levels in hypercholesterolaemic patients after 12 weeks of therapy. In a 12-week study, 100 subjects from both sexes and of > 20 years having hyperlipidaemia, with LDL-C level > 130 mg/dl and total cholesterol > 220 mg/dl were included, and were randomised to receive either a combination of isapgol powder (Naturolax) 5.6 g twice daily and atorvastatin 10 mg once daily or atorvastatin 10 mg once daily alone orally. Serum levels of total cholesterol, LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglyceride were assessed at 8 and 12 weeks. Ninety-seven patients completed the study. At the end of the 8th week, both the groups had a significant reduction in mean LDL-C (20.5% in isapgol + atorvastatin group and 16.0% among atorvastatin alone group) as compared to baseline. But between the groups, however, the difference was not significant. At the end of the 12th week fall in LDL-C at 31.4% for isapgol + atorvastatin was significantly greater than 22.8% among the atorvastatin group (p < 0.05). Serum total cholesterol, HDL-C and triglyceride were significantly lowered within the groups at 8th and 12th weeks but between groups, the difference was not significant. Comparison of adverse events profile in both the groups shows that more number of patients from atorvastatin alone group (n = 14, 28%) had adverse reactions than the number of patients from the combination group (n = 4, 8%; p < 005).

Decreased Skeletal Muscle Mitochondrial DNA in Patients Treated with High-Dose Simvastatin

Statins are generally well tolerated, but can cause myopathy and have been associated with mitochondrial abnormalities. The aim of this study was to determine whether muscle mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) levels are altered during statin therapy. We retrospectively quantified mtDNA in 86 skeletal muscle biopsy specimens collected as part of a previously published clinical trial of high-dose simvastatin or atorvastatin versus placebo.

[Interaction risk with statin switch]

BACKGROUND

The article is based upon two adverse drug reaction reports after switch from atorvastatin to simvastatin. Simvastatin interactions with warfarin and the cytochrome P450-3A4 inhibitor diltiazem were suspected as possible causes of the events (fatal intracranial haemorrhage with INR > 8 and myopathy). Relevant literature was examined to evaluate potential differences in atorvastatin and simvastatin interaction profiles.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Relevant interaction studies were identified through searches in the databases PubMed and ISI Web of Knowledge. Interaction databases referring to primary sources and product monographs were also examined.

RESULTS

One interaction study was found for the warfarin-atorvastatin combination, but this showed no relevant changes in prothrombin time. Three interaction studies were identified for the combination warfarin-simvastatin and these showed consistently increased INR and/or reduced dose requirements for warfarin (10-30%) after starting treatment with simvastatin. Three studies had investigated the degree to which simvastatin and atorvastatin interact with a CYP3A4 inhibitor in the same population. In these studies, plasma concentrations of both statins increased, but the increases were several times greater for simvastatin than for atorvastatin.

INTERPRETATION

Interaction studies show that atorvastatin and simvastatin display differences in interaction potential toward warfarin and drugs inhibiting CYP3A4 metabolism. It is important to consider the risk of interactions when switching to or starting simvastatin treatment.

Effects of Intensive Versus Moderate Lipid-Lowering Therapy on Myocardial Ischemia in Older Patients With Coronary Heart Disease

Background— Clinical trials have demonstrated that, compared with placebo, intensive statin therapy reduces ischemia in patients with acute coronary syndromes and in patients with stable coronary artery disease. However, no studies to date have assessed intensive versus moderate statin therapy in older patients with stable coronary syndromes.

Methods and Results— A total of 893 ambulatory coronary artery disease patients (30% women) 65 to 85 years of age with ≥1 episode of myocardial ischemia that lasted ≥3 minutes during 48-hour ambulatory ECG at screening were randomized to atorvastatin 80 mg/d or pravastatin 40 mg/d and followed up for 12 months. The primary efficacy parameter (absolute change from baseline in total duration of ischemia at month 12) was significantly reduced in both groups at month 3 and month 12 (both P <0.001 for each treatment group) with no significant difference between the treatment groups. Atorvastatin-treated patients experienced greater low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reductions than did pravastatin-treated patients, a trend toward fewer major acute cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.46, 1.09; P =0.114), and a significantly greater reduction in all-cause death (hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.13, 0.83; P =0.014).

Conclusions— Compared with moderate pravastatin therapy, intensive atorvastatin therapy was associated with reductions in cholesterol, major acute cardiovascular events, and death in addition to the reductions in ischemia observed with both therapies. The contrast between the therapies’ differing efficacy for major acute cardiovascular events and death and their nonsignificant difference in efficacy for reduction of ischemia suggests that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol–lowering thresholds for ischemia and major acute cardiovascular events may differ. The Study Assessing Goals in the Elderly (SAGE) demonstrates that older men and women with coronary artery disease benefit from intensive statin therapy.

Risk factors for rhabdomyolysis with simvastatin and atorvastatin

OBJECTIVE

To assess the frequency of risk factors for rhabdomyolysis with simvastatin and atorvastatin in cases reported to the Australian Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee (ADRAC).

DESIGN

Reports meeting the definition of rhabdomyolysis were reviewed for risk factors including age > or = 70 years, dose > or = 40 mg, hepatic dysfunction, diabetes mellitus, hyperkalaemia, hypothyroidism and the use of concomitant interacting medications.

RESULTS

Only one report associated with simvastatin and five reports associated with atorvastatin did not list any risk factors for rhabdomyolysis. Interacting medicines featured in 77% of reports of rhabdomyolysis associated with simvastatin and 44% of reports associated with atorvastatin. A comparison of the age profile for reports of atorvastatin- and simvastatin-associated rhabdomyolysis with that for all adverse drug reaction reports received, and for all reports of muscle disorders, suggested a trend towards an increasing risk of rhabdomyolysis with increasing age with simvastatin but not with atorvastatin. Similarly, comparing prescribed tablet strengths from Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme data with the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor ('statin') doses in reports of rhabdomyolysis suggested a dose-related risk with simvastatin, but a less increased risk with high-dose atorvastatin.

CONCLUSION

Risk factors for rhabdomyolysis featured in nearly all of the reports of statin-associated rhabdomyolysis and the majority of reports listed multiple risk factors, although dependence on risk factors appeared to be stronger with simvastatin than atorvastatin. The multiplication of risk factors in patients taking simvastatin and atorvastatin should be minimised.

Progressive myopathy with up-regulation of MHC-I associated with statin therapy

Statins can cause a necrotizing myopathy and hyperCKaemia which is reversible on cessation of the drug. What is less well known is a phenomenon whereby statins may induce a myopathy, which persists or may progress after stopping the drug. We investigated the muscle pathology in 8 such cases. All had myofibre necrosis but only 3 had an inflammatory infiltrate. In all cases there was diffuse or multifocal up-regulation of MHC-I expression even in non-necrotic fibres. Progressive improvement occurred in 7 cases after commencement of prednisolone and methotrexate, and in one case spontaneously. These observations suggest that statins may initiate an immune-mediated myopathy that persists after withdrawal of the drug and responds to immunosuppressive therapy. The mechanism of this myopathy is uncertain but may involve the induction by statins of an endoplasmic reticulum stress response with associated up-regulation of MHC-I expression and antigen presentation by muscle fibres.

Effect of Atorvastatin on Cognitive Function in Patients from the Lipid Lowering and Onset of Renal Disease (LORD) Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of atorvastatin on cognitive function by testing two hypotheses: that atorvastatin 10 mg/day would impair cognitive function, and that other biochemical and demographic measures would better predict cognitive performance than atorvastatin alone.

DESIGN

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

SETTING

Two primary acute care settings in the north and northwest of Tasmania, Australia.

PATIENTS

Fifty-seven patients from the Lipid Lowering and Onset of Renal Disease (LORD) trial.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomly assigned to receive either atorvastatin 10 mg/day or matching placebo. Cognitive testing was performed in two sessions occurring 12 weeks apart and involved three repeated measures of attention and concentration.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Performance was measured using three standard neuropsychological tests: Digit Symbol Coding subtest, Trail Making Test, and Stroop Color-Word Reading Test. Patients received atorvastatin for a mean of 72.93 weeks and placebo for a mean of 68.85 weeks. Repeated-measures multivariate analysis of variance failed to identify any significant differences between the two groups on any of the three cognitive measures. Multiple regression analyses identified no single factor or combination of plasma cholesterol levels, renal function, liver function, or age that predicted cognitive performance in either the atorvastatin or placebo group on the three measures at either testing session.

CONCLUSION

Atorvastatin 10 mg/day did not produce decrements to cognitive performance. In addition, biochemical and demographic measures and the receipt of atorvastatin versus placebo did not individually or in combination predict cognitive performance on measures of attention and concentration.