Exposure of atorvastatin is unchanged but lactone and acid metabolites are increased several-fold in patients with atorvastatin-induced myopathy

BACKGROUND

The most serious side effect from statin treatment is myopathy, which may proceed to rhabdomyolysis. This is the first study to investigate whether the pharmacokinetics of either atorvastatin or its metabolites, or both, is altered in patients with atorvastatin-related myopathy compared with healthy controls.

METHODS

A 24-hour pharmacokinetic investigation was performed in 14 patients with atorvastatin-related myopathy. Relevant polymorphisms in SLCO1B1 (encoding organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1), MDR1/ABCB1 (encoding P-glycoprotein), and CYP3A5 (encoding cytochrome P450 3A5) were determined. Data from 15 healthy volunteers were used as controls.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in systemic exposure of atorvastatin was observed between the 2 groups. However, patients with atorvastatin-related myopathy had 2.4-fold and 3.1-fold higher systemic exposures of the metabolites atorvastatin lactone (P<.01) and p-hydroxyatorvastatin (P<.01), respectively, compared with controls. There were no differences in frequencies of SLCO1B1, MDR1, and CYP3A5 polymorphisms between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This study disclosed a distinct difference in the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin metabolites between patients with atorvastatin-related myopathy and healthy control subjects. These results are of importance in the further search for the mechanism of statin-induced myopathy.

Efficacy and safety of atorvastatin in the prevention of cardiovascular end points in subjects with type 2 diabetes: the Atorvastatin Study for Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease Endpoints in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (ASPEN)

OBJECTIVE

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk is increased in type 2 diabetes. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of 10 mg of atorvastatin versus placebo on CVD prevention in subjects with type 2 diabetes and LDL cholesterol levels below contemporary guideline targets.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Subjects were randomly assigned to receive 10 mg of atorvastatin or placebo in a 4-year, double-blind, parallel-group study. The composite primary end point comprised cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, recanalization, coronary artery bypass surgery, resuscitated cardiac arrest, and worsening or unstable angina requiring hospitalization.

RESULTS

A total of 2,410 subjects with type 2 diabetes were randomized. Mean LDL cholesterol reduction in the atorvastatin group over 4 years was 29% versus placebo (P < 0.0001). When we compared atorvastatin versus placebo, composite primary end point rates were 13.7 and 15.0%, respectively (hazard ratio 0.90 [95% CI 0.73-1.12]). In the subset of 1,905 subjects without prior myocardial infarction or interventional procedure, 10.4% of atorvastatin- and 10.8% of placebo-treated subjects experienced a primary end point (0.97 [0.74-1.28]). In the 505 subjects with prior myocardial infarction or interventional procedure, 26.2% of atorvastatin- and 30.8% of placebo-treated subjects experienced a primary end point (0.82 [0.59-1.15]). Relative risk reductions in fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction were 27% overall (P = 0.10) and 19% (P = 0.41) and 36% (P = 0.11) for subjects without and with prior myocardial infarction or interventional procedure, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Composite end point reductions were not statistically significant. This result may relate to the overall study design, the types of subjects recruited, the nature of the primary end point, and the protocol changes required because of changing treatment guidelines. For these reasons, the results of the Atorvastatin Study for Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease Endpoints in Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (ASPEN) did not confirm the benefit of therapy but do not detract from the imperative that the majority of diabetic patients are at risk of coronary heart disease and deserve LDL cholesterol lowering to the currently recommended targets.

Quinine-induced renal failure as a result of rhabdomyolysis, haemolytic uraemic syndrome and disseminated intravascular coagulation

This report describes a case of quinine-induced acute renal failure as a result of a combination of haemolytic uraemic syndrome and rhabdomyolysis with disseminated intravascular coagulation. The abrupt onset of symptoms occurred after ingestion of 300 mg of quinine along with atorvastatin. The patient recovered with supportive management, suggesting that plasma exchange may not be necessary in this situation. The possibility of a drug interaction contributing to rhabdomyolysis is raised. The proposed mechanism is through quinine inhibition of the cytochrome P450 isoenzyme 3A4, which may increase systemic levels of atorvastatin by reducing its first-pass metabolism.

Unrecognized side effect of statin treatment: unilateral blepharoptosis

A 43-year-old man receiving statin monotherapy (10 mg atorvastatin) for hypercholesterolemia had unilateral blepharoptosis as the result of isolated myositis of the levator muscle. Statin-induced myositis in the levator muscle should be considered in the differential diagnosis of acquired unilateral blepharoptosis of unknown cause.

Atorvastatin and diabetic vascular complications

Statins inhibit 3-hydroxy-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase, a rate-limiting enzyme for cholesterol synthesis, and share the common mechanism of lowering circulating levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Among various statins, atorvastatin is the most widely used statin for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. Recent clinical trials show that atorvastatin reduces the risk of cardiovascular events and slows the progression of atherosclerosis in patients with coronary artery diseases. Further, intensive therapy with atorvastatin is also associated with an early clinical benefit in patients with acute coronary syndrome. These observations support the concept that beyond lipid-lowering effects of atorvastatin, that is, pleiotropic effects, could contribute at least in part to cardiovascular event reduction. Diabetic vascular complication is a leading cause of end-stage renal failure, acquired blindness, a variety of neuropathies and accelerated atherosclerosis, which could account for disabilities and high mortality rates in patients with diabetes. However, whether atorvastatin therapy decreases the risk for the development and progression of diabetic vascular complications and the way that it might achieve these effects are not fully elucidated. In this paper, we focus on diabetic vascular complications and review the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin in the treatment of these devastating disorders. We further discuss here the possible vasculoprotective properties of atorvastatin in patients with diabetes.

Tolerability of atorvastatin in a population aged ≥65 years: A retrospective pooled analysis of results from fifty randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the safety profile of atorvastatin calcium at 4 doses with that of placebo in elderly patients (age, > or =65 years).

METHODS

A single pooled database (Pfizer Atorvastatin Clinical Program Database) of 50 published and unpublished completed clinical trials was analyzed retrospectively. Tolerability data from male and female study participants aged > or =65 years at the time of study enrollment were extracted from this database and grouped based on treatment: atorvastatin 10, 20, 40, or 80 mg/d, or placebo. Analyses included comparisons of treatment-related and serious adverse events (AEs) of the musculoskeletal, hepatic, and renal systems. Descriptive statistics were employed. No inferential statistical analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 5924 patients were included in the pooled analysis (range of mean age, 71-74 years; white race, 5437 [91.8%]; female sex, 2506 [42.3%]; treatment with atorvastatin 10 mg/d, n = 2042; atorvastatin 20 mg/d, n = 667; atorvastatin 40 mg/d, n = 522; atorvastatin 80 mg/d, n = 1698; and placebo, n = 995). The overall AE profiles appeared similar with all atorvastatin doses and placebo. The proportions of patients experiencing at least 1 treatment-related AE were 16.1%, 10.2%, 11.3%, 15.0%, and 15.3% in the atorvastatin 10-, 20-, 40-, and 80-mg/d, and placebo groups, respectively. The rates of discontinuation due to treatment-associated AEs appeared comparable between all doses of atorvastatin and placebo (2.1% vs 1.7%). Serious AEs were rare (< or =1.0%) and seldom led to withdrawal. The prevalence of treatment-associated myalgia was low in all treatment groups (< or =1.8%). None of the patients experienced persistent creatine kinase elevations >10-fold the upper limit of normal (x ULN), and no cases of myopathy or rhabdomyolysis were reported. The rates of patients with persistent elevation >3 x ULN) of hepatic aminotransferases were 0.1%, 0%, 0.2%, 0.5%, and 0.2% in the atorvastatin 10-, 20-, 40-, and 80-mg/d, and placebo groups, respectively. Although the prevalences of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevations appeared slightly higher in the 80-mg/d group (3.2% vs < or =0.9% in all other groups), specific musculoskeletal and hepatic AEs were rare (< or =3.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

This pooled analysis of 50 published and unpublished studies in elderly patients found that the overall prevalences of AEs did not appear to increase with dose and appeared comparable to that observed with placebo. Although the prevalences of ALT/AST elevations appeared slightly higher in the 80-mg/d group (3.2% vs < or =0.9% in all other groups), specific musculoskeletal and hepatic AEs were rare (< or =3.0%). The rates of discontinuation appeared comparable between all 4 doses of atorvastatin and placebo. The results of this analysis support the favorable safety profile of atorvastatin across the full dose range in patients aged > or =65 years.

Effects of atorvastatin and atorvastatin withdrawal on soluble CD40L and adipocytokines in patients with hypercholesterolaemia

OBJECTIVE

Beyond lipid lowering, statins have pleiotropic effects with favourable benefits against atherogenesis. Withdrawal of statin therapy has been demonstrated to abrogate vascular protective activity and even increase the incidence of thrombotic vascular events. The purpose of this study is to investigate the serial changes of soluble CD40 ligand (sCD40L) and two adipocytokines, adiponectin and resistin, after short-term atorvastatin therapy and withdrawal in patients with hypercholesterolaemia.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty-two patients with hypercholesterolaemia received atorvastatin 10 mg/day for 3 months. Serum lipid profiles, and levels of sCD40L, adiponectin and resistin, were assessed before and immediately after 3 months' statin therapy. Serum levels of sCD40L and adiponectin were also measured on the 3 consecutive days after statin withdrawal. After 3 months' statin therapy, levels of sCD40L (1.93 +/- 1.13 vs. 1.30 +/- 0.97 ng/mL), total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) were all reduced significantly (p < 0.05). However, sCD40L level tended to increase towards baseline on the first and second days after statin withdrawal, but was not significantly elevated until the third day after withdrawal (1.89 +/- 1.28 vs. 1.30 +/- 0.97 ng/mL, p < 0.05). Total cholesterol and LDL-C levels did not increase during the 3 days of statin withdrawal. No significant changes of adiponectin and resistin levels were shown after statin therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that the effect of statin on sCD40L level was abrogated after therapy withdrawal, and was independent of serum cholesterol level. Statin therapy did not significantly alter levels of adiponectin and resistin.

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.

Safety and effects on the lipid and C-reactive protein plasma concentration of the association of ezetimibe plus atorvastatin in renal transplant patients treated by cyclosporine-A: a pilot study

Ezetimibe (E) is a new cholesterol adsorption inhibitor which prevents the adsorption of dietary and biliary cholesterol by binding to a recently described cholesterol transporter. This pilot study was performed to evaluate the safety and the low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-C and C-reactive protein lowering efficacy of atorvastatin (A) and of the association of A plus E in five renal transplant patients with hypercholesterolemia and mild renal functional impairment receiving cyclosporine-A (CsA). Patients received for three periods, each of 3 weeks, A at a dose of 20 mg/day; A at a dose of 10 mg/day and finally, A 10 mg plus E 10 mg daily. The medications were well-tolerated and no important clinical or laboratory (muscle enzyme, creatinine clearance and CsA concentration) abnormalities were observed throughout the study period. A alone lead to target LDL-C values only in two of five patients and did not significantly reduce the mean CRP values. The combination of E plus A produced the lowest lipid levels and significantly reduced CRP mean values and allowed all patients to attain target levels of LDL-C: total cholesterol decreased from 240 +/- 42 (mean +/- S.D.) to 171 +/- 34 mg/dl, LDL-C from 129 +/- 32 to 87 +/- 21 mg/dl, plasma triglycerides from 330 +/- 54 to 194 +/- 71 mg/dl and CRP from 6.2 +/- 1.9 to 3.9 +/- 2.4 mg/l (P < 0.05 for all). This pilot study suggests that the co-administration of E and A at 10 mg/day in renal transplant patients receiving CsA is well-tolerated and effective in reducing important cardiovascular risk factors.

Can combining different risk interventions into a single formulation contribute to improved cardiovascular disease risk reduction? Rationale and design for an international, open-label program to assess the effectiveness of a single pill (amlodipine/atorvastatin) to attain recommended target levels for blood pressure and lipids (The JEWEL Program)

BACKGROUND

In order to prevent cardiovascular events, it is essential to effectively manage overall risk of cardiovascular disease. However, despite guideline recommendations to this effect, current management of the major, modifiable cardiovascular risk factors such as hypertension and dyslipidemia is disconnected and patient adherence to therapy is poor. This is particularly important for patients with multiple cardiovascular risk factors, who are often prescribed multiple medications. The JEWEL study program will investigate the use of single-pill amlodipine/atorvastatin as a strategy to improve management of these patients.

METHODS

The JEWEL program consists of two 16-week, international, open-label, multicenter, titration-to-goal studies in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. The 2 studies differ based on country of enrollment and certain tertiary endpoints, but the overall designs are very similar. Patients have been enrolled from 255 centers across Canada and 13 European countries. The study is designed to assess the efficacy, safety, and utility of amlodipine/atorvastatin single-pill therapy in a real-world setting. Patients will be initiated at a dose of amlodipine 5 mg/atorvastatin 10 mg, unless previously treated, and will be uptitrated as necessary. The primary efficacy parameter is the percentage of patients, at different levels of cardiovascular risk, achieving country-specific guideline-recommended target levels for blood pressure and lipids. A secondary analysis of efficacy measured attainment of the same single goal for blood pressure across all study participants (JEWEL I and II) and the same single goal for LDL-C across all study participants (JEWEL I and II). The program will utilize a newly developed questionnaire to gain better understanding of participants' beliefs and behaviors towards medical treatment of their multiple risk factors. Approximately 2850 patients will be enrolled in the program, which is due to be completed in August 2005.

CONCLUSION

The JEWEL program will assess the effectiveness of a single pill (amlodipine/atorvastatin) in targeting the two principal risk factors for cardiovascular disease simultaneously to achieve nationally applicable treatment targets in a routine clinical practice setting.

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.

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.

Safety and efficacy of atorvastatin in patients with severe renal dysfunction

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of a daily dose of 10 mg of atorvastatin in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 4 and 5 and a glomerular filtration rate of <30 ml/min.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was an open, prospective, randomized study. A total of 143 patients were included: 73 were controls and 70 were prescribed 10 mg/day of atorvastatin. As efficacy variables, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and triglyceride levels were determined at the start of the study and at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months.

RESULTS

The follow-up period was a mean of 20+/-14.4 months (range 1-36 months) for those on atorvastatin versus 22+/-12.7 months (range 0.5-36 months) for the controls. Compared with baseline values, patients treated with atorvastatin had significantly lower concentrations of total cholesterol at Month 36 (5.8 vs 4.4 mmol/l; -23%; p<0.001), of LDL cholesterol at Month 36 (3.6 vs 2.2 mmol/l; -35%; p<0.001) and of triglycerides at Months 24 (2.5 vs 1.9 mmol/l) and 36 (2.5 vs 1.8 mmol/l). The controls had significantly reduced levels of total cholesterol at Month 36 (p<0.21) and of LDL cholesterol at Months 30 and 36. Compared with the controls, the atorvastatin group had lower levels of total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol at Months 1-30. Fifteen patients (21%) stopped taking their medication as they could not tolerate the side-effects, the most frequent complaints being gastrointestinal discomfort and headache.

CONCLUSION

Although the medication caused no severe adverse events, we recommend caution when using atorvastatin for severe CKD patients until further evidence of its safety and efficacy is verified.

Effect of intensive versus standard lipid-lowering treatment with atorvastatin on the progression of calcified coronary atherosclerosis over 12 months: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trials have suggested that intensive versus standard lipid-lowering therapy provides for additional benefit. Electron-beam computed tomography provides the opportunity to quantify the progression of coronary artery calcification (CAC) in serial measurements.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, 471 patients (age 61+/-8 years) who had no history of coronary artery disease and no evidence of high-grade coronary stenoses (>50% diameter reduction) were randomized if they had > or =2 cardiovascular risk factors and moderate calcified coronary atherosclerosis as evidenced by a CAC score > or =30. Patients were assigned to receive 80 mg or 10 mg of atorvastatin per day over 12 months. Progression of CAC volume scores could be analyzed in 366 patients. After pretreatment with 10 mg of atorvastatin for 4 weeks, 12 months of study medication reduced LDL cholesterol from 106+/-22 to 87+/-33 mg/dL in the group randomized to receive 80 mg of atorvastatin (P<0.001), whereas levels remained stable in the group randomized to receive 10 mg (108+/-23 at baseline, 109+/-28 mg/dL at the end of the study, P=NS). The mean progression of CAC volume scores, corrected for the baseline CAC volume score, was 27% (95% CI 20.8% to 33.1%) in the 80-mg atorvastatin group and 25% (95% CI 19.1% to 30.8%) in the 10-mg atorvastatin group (P=0.65). CAC progression showed no relationship with on-treatment LDL cholesterol levels.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not observe a relationship between on-treatment LDL cholesterol levels and the progression of calcified coronary atherosclerosis. Over a period of 12 months, intensive atorvastatin therapy was unable to attenuate CAC progression compared with standard atorvastatin therapy. The possibility remains that the time window was too short to demonstrate an effect.

Influences of Statins on Glucose Tolerance in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Atorvastatin is frequently administered for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, a marked deterioration of glycemic control has been reported in some patients treated with atorvastatin. No study has been done to determine whether atorvastatin adversely affects glycemic control. In this study, we retrospectively compared an atorvastatin-treated group (Group A, n = 76) with a pravastatin-treated group (Group P, n = 78) to examine the effects of the 2 statins on glycemic control from the onset of administration to 3 months thereafter. No change occurred in the antidiabetic drug dose in 62 patients of Group A and 68 patients of Group P. In those patients, arbitrary blood glucose levels increased from 147 +/- 50 (mean +/- SD) mg/dL to 177 +/- 70 mg/dL in Group A and from 140 +/- 38 mg/dL to 141 +/- 32 mg/dL in Group P. HbA(1c) increased from 6.8 +/- 0.9% to 7.2 +/- 1.1% in Group A and from 6.9 +/- 0.9% to 6.9 +/- 1.0% in Group P. The increase was significant only in Group A, and the extent of the increase was also significantly greater in Group A. These results suggest a predisposition to a deterioration of glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients treated with atorvastatin.

Comparative safety of atorvastatin 80 mg versus 10 mg derived from analysis of 49 completed trials in 14,236 patients

Atorvastatin has been shown to reduce coronary events and revascularization procedures in patients with multiple risk factors for coronary heart disease. Recent studies with atorvastatin 80 mg support the overall safety of this dose during long-term treatment. However, physicians appear reluctant to use high doses of statins. A retrospective analysis of pooled data from 49 clinical trials of atorvastatin in 14,236 patients treated for an average period of 2 weeks to 52 months was conducted. The study compared the safety of atorvastatin 10 mg (n = 7,258), atorvastatin 80 mg (n = 4,798), and placebo (n = 2,180) and included analyses on treatment-associated adverse events; nonserious and serious adverse events related to the musculoskeletal, hepatic, and renal systems; the incidence of elevations of creatine kinase >10 times the upper limit of normal (ULN); and hepatic transaminases >3 times ULN. Percentages of patients experiencing > or =1 adverse event were similar across all 3 groups. Withdrawals due to treatment-related adverse events were observed in 2.4%, 1.8%, and 1.2% of patients in the atorvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Serious adverse events were rare and seldom led to treatment withdrawal with any dose. Treatment-associated myalgia was observed in 1.4%, 1.5%, and 0.7% of patients in the atorvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. No cases of rhabdomyolysis were reported in any group. Persistent elevations in hepatic transaminases >3 times ULN were observed in 0.1%, 0.6%, and 0.2% of patients in the atorvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. The incidence of treatment-associated adverse events for atorvastatin 80 mg was similar to that of atorvastatin 10 mg and placebo. In conclusion, the results of this analysis support the positive safety profile of atorvastatin at the highest dose.

Effect of atorvastatin withdrawal on circulating coenzyme Q10 concentration in patients with hypercholesterolemia

Statin therapy can reduce the biosynthesis of both cholesterol and coenzyme Q10 by blocking the common upstream mevalonate pathway. Coenzyme Q10 depletion has been speculated to play a potential role in statin-related adverse events, and withdrawal of statin is the choice in patients developing myotoxicity or liver toxicity. However, the effect of statin withdrawal on circulating levels of coenzyme Q10 remains unknown. Twenty-six patients with hypercholesterolemia received atorvastatin at 10 mg/day for 3 months. Serum lipid profiles and coenzyme Q10 were assessed before and immediately after 3 months and were also measured 2 and 3 days after the last day on the statin. After 3 months' atorvastatin therapy, serum levels of total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and coenzyme Q10 (0.43 +/- 0.23 to 0.16 +/- 0.10 microg/mL) were all significantly reduced (all p<0.001). On day 2 after the last atorvastatin, the coenzyme Q10 level was significantly elevated (0.37 +/- 0.16 microg/mL) and maintained the same levels on day 3 (0.39 +/- 0.18 microg/mL) compared with those on month 3 (both p< 0.001), while TC and LDL-C did not significantly change within the same 3 days. These results suggest that statin inhibition of coenzyme Q10 synthesis is less strict than inhibition of cholesterol biosynthesis.

Torcetrapib and atorvastatin: A novel combination therapy for dyslipidemia

Epidemiological studies have identified both low-density lipoproteins (LDL) and high-density lipoproteins (HDL) as independent factors that modulate the risk of cardiovascular disease. Statins (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors) that lower LDL and triglyceride levels are widely used for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. Recently, a new class of drugs, cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitors, which significantly raise HDL and lower LDL, has been developed. Torcetrapib, a CETP inhibitor, has been shown to be effective, safe and well tolerated when used in combination with atorvastatin therapy. Torcetrapib has been shown to increase HDL cholesterol levels by 46% when given alone and by 61% when given in combination with atorvastatin, as well as to decrease LDL cholesterol levels by more than that achieved by atorvastatin alone. When the dosage of torcetrapib was doubled (at maximum tolerated dose), HDL increased by over 100%. Combination therapy appeared safe and well tolerated. Large trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of torcetrapib in combination therapy with atorvastatin are now in progress in order to establish whether CETP inhibition in combined therapy with statins will reduce the risk for atherosclerosis.