Cerivastatin for lowering lipids

Pravastatin for lowering lipids

BACKGROUND

A detailed summary and meta-analysis of the dose-related effect of pravastatin on lipids is not available.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To assess the pharmacology of pravastatin by characterizing the dose-related effect and variability of the effect of pravastatin on the surrogate marker: low-density lipoprotein (LDL cholesterol). The effect of pravastatin on morbidity and mortality is not the objective of this systematic review. Secondary objectives • To assess the dose-related effect and variability of effect of pravastatin on the following surrogate markers: total cholesterol; high-density lipoprotein (HDL cholesterol); and triglycerides. • To assess the effect of pravastatin on withdrawals due to adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to September 2021: CENTRAL (2021, Issue 8), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Bireme LILACS, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of pravastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks in participants of any age with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included, and extracted data. We entered lipid data from placebo-controlled trials into Review Manager 5 as continuous data and withdrawal due to adverse effects (WDAEs) data as dichotomous data. We searched for WDAEs information from all trials. We assessed all trials using Cochrane's risk of bias tool under the categories of sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other potential biases.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-four RCTs evaluated the dose-related efficacy of pravastatin in 9771 participants. The participants were of any age, with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease, and pravastatin effects were studied within a treatment period of three to 12 weeks. Log dose-response data over the doses of 5 mg to 160 mg revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol, and a weak linear dose-related effect on blood triglycerides. There was no dose-related effect of pravastatin on blood HDL cholesterol. Pravastatin 10 mg/day to 80 mg/day reduced LDL cholesterol by 21.7% to 31.9%, total cholesterol by 16.1% to 23.3%,and triglycerides by 5.8% to 20.0%. The certainty of evidence for these effects was judged to be moderate to high. For every two-fold dose increase there was a 3.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 4.6) decrease in blood LDL cholesterol. This represented a dose-response slope that was less than the other studied statins: atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, fluvastatin, pitavastatin and cerivastatin. From other systematic reviews we conducted on statins for its effect to reduce LDL cholesterol, pravastatin is similar to fluvastatin, but has a decreased effect compared to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, pitavastatin and cerivastatin. The effect of pravastatin compared to placebo on WADES has a risk ratio (RR) of 0.81 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.03). The certainty of evidence was judged to be very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pravastatin lowers blood total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglyceride in a dose-dependent linear fashion. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with pravastatin because of the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 48.4% of the randomized placebo-controlled trials.

Risk factors for drug-treated major adverse cardio-cerebrovascular events in patients on primary preventive statin therapy: A retrospective cohort study

We aim to identify risk factors of major adverse cardio-cerebrovascular events (MACCE) using a proxy of drug treatment for a MACCE after the start of statin therapy in the primary cardiovascular prevention group, taking drug dose, persistency and adherence into account. We conducted a retrospective inception cohort study using data from the University of Groningen prescription database IADB.nl, covering patients in the Northern part of the Netherlands. We identified adult starters on primary preventive statin therapy as patients without any statin or cardiovascular drug prescription in the two years before the first statin dispensing and used a weighted Cox proportional hazard model to estimate hazard ratios (HR) with their 95 % confidence intervals (95 %CI). Among 39,487 primary preventive statin starters, 23% received drug treatment for a MACCE within a median follow-up period of four years. Increasing age, male gender and presence of diabetes drug treatment were significantly associated with the outcome (HR: 1.03; 95 %CI: 1.02-1.04; HR: 1.27; 95 %CI: 1.12-1.44 and HR: 1.39; 95 %CI: 1.24-1.56, respectively). If patients remained statin therapy persistent, adherence was no longer associated with drug treatment for a MACCE. In 23 % of the statin therapy initiators, incident drug treatment for a MACCE occurred with a median of four years. To reduce event rates in this group, older patients, males and diabetes patients should be closely monitored. Non-adherence in the early stage of treatment should be avoided to prevent non-persistence.

Facts and ideas on statins with respect to their lipophilicity: a focus on skeletal muscle cells and bone besides known cardioprotection

Statins are known to block cholesterol synthesis in the liver. They also exhibit non-lipid pleiotropic effects due to the inhibition of protein prenylation, thereby modulating various signaling pathways of cellular homeostasis and integrity. Both lipid control and pleiotropic action of statins are clinically used, mainly for treatment of hypercholesterolemia and primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Because the prescription of statins is increasing and statin therapy is often lifelong, in particular in patients with other risk factors, safety issues being associated with polymorbidity and polypragmasia as well as the persistence with and adherence to statins are specific points of attention of clinicians and clinical pharmacologists. Furthermore, because skeletal myocytes have a cholesterol inhibitory sensitivity greater than hepatocytes, a choice of an appropriate statin based on its lipophilicity and the associated likelihood of its side effects on skeletal muscle cells and bone is warranted in such polymorbid patients. These approaches can effectively modulate the risk: benefit ratio and highlight a need for personalized therapy as much as possible, thereby minimizing risk of discontinuation of therapy and poor compliance.

Role of Traditional Cardiovascular Risk Factors after Initiation of Statin Therapy: A PharmLines Inception Cohort Study

Background

Multiple studies and meta-analyses examined the role of traditional risk factors for cardiovascular events in statin treatment-naive patients. Nowadays, millions receive such therapy for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events (CVE).

Objective

CVEs still occur in patients on primary preventive statin therapy. Therefore, further risk stratification within these patients is urgently needed.

Methods

Using the unique linkage between biomedical data and prescription data from the PharmLines Initiative, we assessed the role of several risk factors used in cardiovascular risk models, using a time-dependent Cox PH model, in the occurrence of drug treatment of CVEs after initiation of statin therapy.

Results

Among 602 statin therapy starters, 11% received drug treatment for CVE within an average follow-up period of 832 days. After multivariable modelling, cholesterol levels and blood pressure at baseline were no longer associated, whereas self-reported diabetes and increasing age were highly associated with the outcome when on statin therapy (hazard ratio (HR): 3.01, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.48-6.12 and 1.04; 95% CI: 1.01-1.07, respectively). Males, smokers, and nonadherent patients had increased risks (HR 1.6, 1.12, and 1.18, resp.), though not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Drug treatment for CVEs after statin initiation is increased in patients with diabetes type 2, in aged patients, males, smokers, and those with poor adherence, while there was no association with baseline cholesterol levels and blood pressure. These factors should be taken into account during the monitoring of statin therapy and may lead to changes in statin treatment or risk-related lifestyle factors.

The Immunomodulatory Effects of Statins on Macrophages

Statins are 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors used worldwide to manage dyslipidaemia and thus limit the development of atherosclerotic disease and its complications. These atheroprotective drugs are now known to exert pleiotropic actions outside of their cholesterol-lowering activity, including altering immune cell function. Macrophages are phagocytic leukocytes that play critical functional roles in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and are directly targeted by statins. Early studies documented the anti-inflammatory effects of statins on macrophages, but emerging evidence suggests that these drugs can also enhance pro-inflammatory macrophage responses, creating an unresolved paradox. This review comprehensively examines the in vitro, in vivo, and clinical literature to document the statin-induced changes in macrophage polarization and immunomodulatory functions, explore the underlying mechanisms involved, and offer potential explanations for this paradox. A better understanding of the immunomodulatory actions of statins on macrophages should pave the way for the development of novel therapeutic approaches to manage atherosclerosis and other chronic diseases and conditions characterised by unresolved inflammation.

Effect of Patient Financial Incentives on Statin Adherence and Lipid Control: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Financial incentives can improve medication adherence and cardiovascular disease risk, but the optimal design to promote sustained adherence after incentives are discontinued is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether 6-month interventions involving different financial incentives to encourage statin adherence reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels from baseline to 12 months.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 4-group, randomized clinical trial was conducted from August 2013 to July 2018 among several large US insurer or employer populations and the University of Pennsylvania Health System. The study population included adults with elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, suboptimal LDL-C control, and evidence of imperfect adherence to statin medication. Data analysis was performed from July 2017 to June 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions lasted 6 months during which all participants received daily medication reminders and an electronic pill bottle. Statin adherence was measured by opening the bottle. For participants randomized to the 3 intervention groups, adherence was rewarded with financial incentives. The sweepstakes group involved incentives for daily adherence. In the deadline sweepstakes group, incentives were reduced if participants were adherent only after a reminder. The sweepstakes plus deposit contract group split incentives between daily adherence and a monthly deposit reduced for each day of nonadherence.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change in LDL-C level from baseline to 12 months.

RESULTS

Among 805 participants randomized (199 in the simple daily sweepstakes group, 204 in the deadline sweepstakes group, 201 in the sweepstakes plus deposit contract group, and 201 in the control group), the mean (SD) age was 58.5 (10.3) years; 519 participants (64.5%) were women, 514 (63.9%) had diabetes, and 273 (33.9%) had cardiovascular disease. The mean (SD) baseline LDL-C level was 143.2 (42.5) mg/dL. Measured adherence at 6 months (defined as the proportion of 180 days with electronic pill bottle opening) in the control group (0.69; 95% CI, 0.66-0.72) was lower than that in the simple sweepstakes group (0.84; 95% CI, 0.81-0.87), the deadline sweepstakes group (0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.89), and the sweepstakes plus deposit contract group (0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90) (P < .001 for each incentive group vs control). LDL-C levels were measured for 636 participants at 12 months. Mean LDL-C level reductions from baseline to 12 months were 33.6 mg/dL (95% CI, 28.4-38.8 mg/dL) in the control group, 32.4 mg/dL (95% CI, 27.3-37.6 mg/dL) in the sweepstakes group, 33.2 mg/dL (95% CI, 28.1-38.3 mg/dL) in the deadline sweepstakes group, and 36.5 mg/dL (95% CI, 31.3-41.7 mg/dL) in the sweepstakes plus deposit contract group (adjusted P > .99 for each incentive group vs control).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Compared with the control group, different financial incentives improved measured statin adherence but not LDL-C levels. This result points to the importance of directly measuring health outcomes, rather than simply adherence, in trials aimed at improving health behaviors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01798784.

Differences in longitudinal associations of cardiovascular risk factors with arterial stiffness and pressure wave reflection in middle-aged Japanese men

The present prospective observational study was conducted to examine the differences in longitudinal associations of the conventional risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) with arterial stiffness and with abnormal pressure wave reflection using repeated measurement data. In 4016 healthy middle-aged (43 ± 9 years) Japanese men without CVD at baseline, the conventional risk factors for CVD, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (brachial-ankle PWV) and radial augmentation index (rAI) were measured annually over a 9-year period. Mixed-model linear regression analysis demonstrated a significant independent positive longitudinal association of the mean blood pressure with both the brachial-ankle PWV (estimate = 5.51, standard error = 0.30, P < 0.01) and the rAI (estimate = 0.19, standard error = 0.02, P < 0.01). On the other hand, the serum levels of glycohemoglobin, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides showed longitudinal associations only with the brachial-ankle PWV and not the rAI. In addition, while the radial AI was found to show a significant longitudinal association with the brachial-ankle PWV, the inverse association was not significant. In conclusion, the conventional risk factors for CVD showed heterogeneous longitudinal associations with arterial stiffness and/or abnormal pressure wave reflection. Elevated blood pressure showed independent longitudinal associations with both arterial stiffness (macrovascular damage) and abnormal pressure wave reflection, suggesting that BP is also longitudinally associated, at least in part, with microvascular damage. On the other hand, abnormal glucose metabolism and dyslipidemia showed independent longitudinal associations with only arterial stiffness (macrovascular damage).

Pitavastatin for lowering lipids

BACKGROUND

Pitavastatin is the newest statin on the market, and the dose-related magnitude of effect of pitavastatin on blood lipids is not known.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of pitavastatin on the surrogate markers: LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and triglycerides in participants with and without cardiovascular disease. To compare the effect of pitavastatin on surrogate markers with other statins.  Secondary objectives To quantify the effect of various doses of pitavastatin on withdrawals due to adverse effects.  SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for trials up to March 2019: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 2, 2019), MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCT and controlled before-and-after studies evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of pitavastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks in participants of any age with and without cardiovascular disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included, and extracted data. We entered data from RCT and controlled before-and-after studies into Review Manager 5 as continuous and generic inverse variance data, respectively. Withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAE) information was collected from the RCTs. We assessed all included trials using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool under the categories of allocation (selection bias), blinding (performance bias and detection bias), incomplete outcome data (attrition bias), selective reporting (reporting bias), and other potential sources of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven studies (five RCTs and 42 before-and-after studies) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of pitavastatin in 5436 participants. The participants were of any age with and without cardiovascular disease, and pitavastatin effects were studied within a treatment period of three to 12 weeks. Log dose-response data over doses of 1 mg to 16 mg revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol and triglycerides. There was no dose-related effect of pitavastatin on blood HDL cholesterol, which was increased by 4% on average by pitavastatin. Pitavastatin 1 mg/day to 16 mg/day reduced LDL cholesterol by 33.3% to 54.7%, total cholesterol by 23.3% to 39.0% and triglycerides by 13.0% to 28.1%. For every two-fold dose increase, there was a 5.35% (95% CI 3.32 to 7.38) decrease in blood LDL cholesterol, a 3.93% (95% CI 2.35 to 5.50) decrease in blood total cholesterol and a 3.76% (95% CI 1.03 to 6.48) decrease in blood triglycerides. The certainty of evidence for these effects was judged to be high. When compared to other statins for its effect to reduce LDL cholesterol, pitavastatin is about 6-fold more potent than atorvastatin, 1.7-fold more potent than rosuvastatin, 77-fold more potent than fluvastatin and 3.3-fold less potent than cerivastatin. For the placebo group, there were no participants who withdrew due to an adverse effect per 109 subjects and for all doses of pitavastatin, there were three participants who withdrew due to an adverse effect per 262 subjects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pitavastatin lowers blood total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglyceride in a dose-dependent linear fashion. Based on the effect on LDL cholesterol, pitavastatin is about 6-fold more potent than atorvastatin, 1.7-fold more potent than rosuvastatin, 77-fold more potent than fluvastatin and 3.3-fold less potent than cerivastatin. There were not enough data to determine risk of withdrawal due to adverse effects due to pitavastatin.