An overview of the extra-lipid effects of rosuvastatin

Rosuvastatin treatment is associated with an increase in insulin resistance in hyperlipidaemic patients with impaired fasting glucose

AIM OF THE STUDY

The increase in physician-reported diabetes following rosuvastatin treatment in the Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin study has raised concerns whether this statin exerts a detrimental effect on glucose metabolism. We assessed the effect of rosuvastatin treatment across dose range on glucose homeostasis in hyperlipidaemic patients with impaired fasting glucose (IFG), who are at high risk to develop diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

The medical records of 72 hypelipidaemic patients with IFG on rosuvastatin 10 (RSV10 group), 20 (RSV20 group) and 40 mg/day (RSV40 group) were reviewed. The median follow up was 12.4 weeks. At the first visit, prior to rosuvastatin prescription and at the latest visit, serum lipid profile and indices of glucose metabolism, including fasting glucose, insulin and HOmeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA(IR)) index levels, were assessed.

RESULTS

Rosuvastatin treatment improved lipid profile and was associated with a dose-dependent significant increase in HOMA(IR) values by 25.4%, 32.3% and 44.8% at the dose of 10, 20 and 40 mg/day (p < 0.01 for all, p < 0.05 for the comparison between groups), respectively, mirrored by correspondent increase in plasma insulin levels [by 21.7%, 25.7% and 46.2% in the RSV10, RSV20 and RSV40 group (p < 0.001 for all) respectively]. Baseline HOMA(IR) levels was the most important contributor (R(2) = 68.1%, p < 0.001), followed by the dose of rosuvastatin treatment (R(2) = 23.7%, p < 0.01), in a model that explained 91.8% of the variability in HOMA(IR) increase.

CONCLUSION

In patients with IFG and hyperlipidaemia, rosuvastatin treatment was associated with a dose-dependent increase in insulin resistance.

Inflammation but not endothelial dysfunction is associated with the severity of coronary artery disease in dyslipidemic subjects

Introduction. Endothelial dysfunction and inflammation play a key role in the development of atherosclerosis. The present study evaluated endothelial function, inflammatory parameters, and carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) in dyslipidemic patients with or without coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods. Metabolic profile and inflammatory parameters were determined in dyslipidemic patients with (+CAD, n = 33) and without (−CAD, n = 69) symptomatic CAD. Endothelial function was evaluated by flow mediated dilatation (FMD) and plasma concentration of nitrites and nitrates. Carotid IMT was measured by ultrasound. Results. No significant differences were observed in anthropometric hemodynamic or metabolic parameters between the groups. After adjusting by age and medication usage, some inflammatory markers were significantly higher in +CAD; however no significant differences in FMD or plasma levels of nitrites were observed. Conclusions. In subjects with dyslipidemia, the presence of CAD is associated with an elevation of certain inflammatory markers and carotid IMT but not with further endothelial dysfunction.

Cardiovascular risk reduction: what do recent trials with rosuvastatin tell us?

Abundant evidence from large-scale clinical trials supports the importance of lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) to decrease the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events. The LDL-C targets in various guidelines remain important treatment goals but, even in trials where statin therapy achieves substantial reduction of LDL-C, a significant number of CVD events still occur and the residual risk remains high. These findings suggest that lipid parameters other than LDL-C, such as high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, and LDL particle size, can influence the risk of CVD. On this basis, other strategies that can alter the lipid profile, in particular raising HDL.C, may provide additional benefits. Other factors such as HDL-C functionality and susceptibility to oxidation and inflammatory factors can also influence cardiovascular risk. In addition to the modifications of the lipid profile, statins have cholesterol-independent beneficial pleiotropic effects. The contribution of these effects to event reduction is not yet fully understood. Recently, the body of evidence has expanded to support the use of intensive statin therapy in broader patient populations. The JUPITER trial has shown the benefit of intensive statin treatment in low-risk subjects with high levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein and average levels of LDL-C. Unlike the setting of primary and secondary prevention, the results of statin trials in patients with heart failure have shown no clear benefit in terms of survival. The recently published AURORA trial was carried out to investigate the effect of rosuvastatin in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing chronic hemodialysis. In this trial no benefit on cardiovascular events was shown with statin therapy. In conclusion, large outcomes trials have clearly shown that statin treatments have a favorable benefit/risk profile in a large range of patients at different levels of risk, with the exception of patients with heart failure and those with renal disease undergoing dialysis. Further evidence is needed on the role of therapeutic strategies on the so-called residual risk.

Dose-dependent effect of rosuvastatin treatment on HDL-subfraction phenotype in patients with primary hyperlipidemia

Although the raising effect of rosuvastatin on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol is well-established, there is a paucity of data regarding the effect of this statin on the high-density lipoprotein subfraction phenotype. A total of 150 participants without evidence of cardiovascular disease were randomized to therapeutic lifestyle modification (nonstatin-treated group) or to therapeutic lifestyle modification plus rosuvastatin at 10 mg/d (RSV10 group) or 20 mg/d (RSV20 group). We assessed the effect of rosuvastatin on the cholesterol mass of high-density lipoprotein subfractions at baseline as well as after 12 weeks post-treatment. Rosuvastatin treatment dose-dependently increased the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (3.4% vs 5.3% in the RSV10 and RSV20 groups, respectively, P = .02). A dose-related rosuvastatin-induced increase in the cholesterol concentration of large high-density lipoprotein particles was also noted (by 11.4% in RSV10 group vs 22.0% in the RSV20 group, P = .01). Rosuvastatin treatment increases the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol by increasing the cholesterol mass only of the larger high-density lipoprotein particles in a dose-dependent manner.