Rosuvastatin may Modulate Insulin Signaling and Inhibit Atherogenesis Beyond its Plasma Cholesterol-Lowering Effect in Insulin-Resistant Mice

Effects of treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease on heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

In the past few decades, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) have become the most common chronic liver disease and the main form of heart failure (HF), respectively. NAFLD is closely associated with HFpEF by sharing common risk factors and/or by boosting systemic inflammation, releasing other secretory factors, and having an expansion of epicardial adipose tissue (EAT). Therefore, the treatments of NAFLD may also affect the development and prognosis of HFpEF. However, no specific drugs for NAFLD have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and some non-specific treatments for NAFLD are applied in the clinic. Currently, the treatments of NAFLD can be divided into non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments. Non-pharmacological treatments mainly include dietary intervention, weight loss by exercise, caloric restriction, and bariatric surgery. Pharmacological treatments mainly include administering statins, thiazolidinediones, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, and metformin. This review will mainly focus on analyzing how these treatments may affect the development and prognosis of HFpEF.

Synergistic protective effects of a statin and an angiotensin receptor blocker for initiation and progression of atherosclerosis

Aim

Although the atheroprotective effects of statins and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are well-established, little is known about their additive effects, especially during the early period of atherosclerosis. The aim of this study was to investigate whether combination of a statin and an ARB exerts synergistic anti-atherosclerotic effects, and to elucidate the mechanisms of combined effects.

Methods

Atherosclerotic plaques were developed in arteries of 23 rabbits using a high-cholesterol diet (HCD) and intra-arterial balloon inflation. Rabbits received one of five different treatment strategies for 4 weeks: positive control [n = 5, HCD]; negative control [n = 3, regular chow diet]; statin [n = 5, HCD and rosuvastatin 10 mg]; ARB [n = 5, HCD and olmesartan 20 mg]; and combination [n = 5, HCD and statin+ARB].

Results

Histological analysis demonstrated that development of atherosclerotic plaques was inhibited more in combination group than in statin group (P = 0.001). Although macrophage infiltration identified by RAM11 staining was not significantly different between combination and individual treatment groups (31.76±4.84% [combination] vs. 38.11±6.53% [statin; P = 0.35] or 35.14±2.87% [ARB; P = 0.62]), the relative proportion of pro-inflammatory M1-macrophages was significantly lower in combination group than in ARB group (3.20±0.47% vs. 5.20±0.78%, P = 0.02). Furthermore, M2-macrophage polarization was higher in combination group than in statin group (17.70±3.04% vs. 7.86±0.68%, P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Combination treatment with a statin and an ARB produced synergistic protective effects for atherosclerosis initiation and progression, which may be attributed to modulation of macrophage characteristics in the early period of atherosclerosis.

Pravastatin improves risk factors but not ischaemic tolerance in obese rats

Statins are effective in management of dyslipidaemia, and a cornerstone of CVD prevention strategies. However, the impacts of their pleiotropic effects on other cardiovascular risk factors and myocardial responses to infarction are not well characterised. We hypothesised that pravastatin treatment in obesity improves lipid profiles, insulin-resistance and myocardial resistance to ischaemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury. Wistar rats were fed a control (C) chow or high carbohydrate and fat diet (HCFD) for 16 weeks with vehicle or pravastatin (prava 7.5 mg/kg/day) treatment for 8 weeks. At 16 weeks HOMAs were performed, blood samples collected and hearts excised for Langendorff perfusions/biochemical analyses. Anti-oxidant activity and proteins regulating mitochondrial fission/fusion and apoptosis were assessed. The HCFD increased body weight (736±15 vs. 655±12 g for C; P<0.001), serum triglycerides (2.91±0.52 vs. 1.64±0.26 mmol/L for C; P<0.001) and insulin-resistance (HOMA- 6.9±0.8 vs. 4.2±0.5 for C; P<0.05) while prava prevented diet induced changes and paradoxically increased lipid peroxidation. The HCFD increased infarct size (34.1±3.1% vs. 18.8±3.0% of AAR for C; P<0.05), which was unchanged by prava in C and HCFD animals. The HCFD decreased cardiac TxR activity and mitochondrial MFN-1 and increased mitochondrial DRP-1 (reducing MFN-1:DRP-1 ratio) and Bax expression, with the latter changes prevented by prava. While unaltered by diet, cytosolic levels of Bax and caspase-3 were reduced by prava in C and HCFD hearts (without changes in cleaved caspase-3). We conclude that obesity, hyper-triglyceridemia and impaired glycemic control in HCFD rats are countered by prava. Despite improved risk factors, prava did not reduce myocardial infarct size, potentially reflecting its complex pleiotropic impacts on cardiac GPX activity and MFN-1, DRP-1, caspase-3 and Bcl-2 proteins.

Statins and risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus: is there a rationale for individualized statin therapy?

Statins (hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme-A reductase inhibitors) are first-line agents for the management of hyperlipidemia in patients at high risk of cardiovascular (CV) events, and are the most commonly prescribed CV drugs worldwide. Although safe and generally well tolerated, there is growing evidence to suggest that statins are associated with an elevated occurrence of new-onset diabetes mellitus (DM). Recent experimental and clinical data have prompted the US Food and Drug Administration to add information to statin labels regarding the increased risk of development of type 2 DM. The main purpose of this review is to critically discuss the clinical evidence regarding the association of statin use with new-onset DM, the CV benefit/risk ratio with statins, and the rationale for individualized statin therapy.

The good and bad effects of statins on insulin sensitivity and secretion

AIMS

Statins are the main lipid-lowering treatment in both primary and secondary prevention populations. Whether statins deteriorates glycemic control, predisposing to the onset of diabetes mellitus has been a matter of recent concern. Statins may accelerate progression to diabetes via molecular mechanisms that impact insulin sensitivity and secretion. In this review, we debate the relative effect of statins in driving insulin resistance and the impairment of insulin secretion.

METHODS

Narrative overview of the literature synthesizing the findings of literature was retrieved from searches of computerized databases, hand searches, and authoritative texts employing the key words "Statins", "Randomized Clinical Trial", "Insulin sensitivity", "Insulin resistance", "Insulin Secretion", "Diabetes Mellitus" alone and/or in combination.

RESULTS

The weight of clinical evidence suggests a worsening effect of statins on insulin resistance and secretion, anyway basic science studies did not find a clear molecular explanation, providing conflicting evidence regarding both the beneficial and the adverse effects of statin therapy on insulin sensitivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most of the clinical studies suggest a worsening of insulin resistance and secretion, the cardiovascular benefits of statin therapy outweigh the risk of developing insulin resistance, thus the data suggest the need to treat dyslipidemia and to make patients aware of the possible risk of developing type 2 diabetes or, if they already are diabetic, of worsening their metabolic control.