Efficacy and safety of ABT-335 (fenofibric acid) in combination with rosuvastatin in patients with mixed dyslipidemia: A phase 3 study

Case Report: Acute Pancreatitis in an Uncontrolled Diabetic Patient Presenting With a Skin Rash Later Found to Be Eruptive Xanthoma, a Dermatological Manifestation and Diagnostic Clue to Recognizing Hypertriglyceridemia as the Cause of Disease

Acute pancreatitis results from any insult that leads to inflammation of the organ. Hypertriglyceridemia is one of the risk factors associated with acute pancreatitis. The typical presentation is abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. We present a unique case in which the patient's condition was further complicated by diabetic ketoacidosis. Consequently, he presented somnolent to the emergency room, providing a limited history only pertaining to generalized weakness and a skin rash. The patient was found to have hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis, which was appropriately managed in the intensive care unit. The skin lesions were diagnosed as xanthomas, which are associated with hypertriglyceridemia and acute pancreatitis secondary to hypertriglyceridemia. The patient was discharged on fibrate therapy, dietary counseling, and strict monitoring by his primary care physician. This unique case highlights the importance of recognizing dermatological conditions and their associated diseases to allow for prompt diagnosis and treatment in the face of limited history.

The Effect of Fibrates on Kidney Function and Chronic Kidney Disease Progression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Studies

AIM

Fibrates have proven efficacy in cardiovascular risk reduction and are commonly used, in addition to statins, to control hypertriglyceridaemia. Their use is often limited due to reduction in glomerular filtration rate at treatment initiation. However, recent studies suggest benign changes in kidney function and improvement of proteinuria, an established early marker of microvascular disease and kidney disease progression. We summarize the evidence from existing trials and provide a summary of effects of fibrates, alone or in combination, on kidney disease progression and proteinuria.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (PROSPERO CRD42020187764). Out of 12,243 potentially eligible studies, 29 were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis, with a total of 20,176 patients. Mean creatinine increased by 1.05 (95% CI (0.63 to 1.46)) units in patients receiving fibrates vs. comparator, and this was similar in all other subgroups. eGFR showed a bigger decrease in the fibrates arm (SMD -1.99; 95% CI (-3.49 to -0.48)) when all studies were pooled together. Notably, short-term serum creatinine and eGFR changes remained constant in the long-term. Pooled estimates show that fibrates improve albuminuria progression, RR 0.86; 95% CI (0.76 to 0.98); albuminuria regression, RR 1.19; 95% CI (1.08 to 1.310).

CONCLUSIONS

Fibrates improve albuminuria in patients with and without diabetes when used to treat hyperlipidaemia. The modest creatinine increase should not be a limiting factor for fibrate initiation in people with preserved renal function or mild CKD. The long-term effects on kidney disease progression warrant further study.

Comparative efficacy and safety of statin and fibrate monotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of head-to-head randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether in adults with dyslipidemia, statins reduce cardiovascular events, mortality, and adverse effects when compared to fibrates.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of head-to-head randomized trials of statin and fibrate monotherapy. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, WHO International Controlled Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through October 30, 2019. Trials that had a follow-up of at least 28 days, and reported mortality or a cardiovascular outcome of interest were eligible for inclusion. Efficacy outcomes were cardiovascular mortality and major cardiovascular events. Safety outcomes included myalgia, serious adverse effects, elevated serum creatinine, and elevated serum alanine aminotransferase. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

We included 19 eligible trials that directly compared statin and fibrate monotherapy and reported mortality or a cardiovascular event. Studies had a limited duration of follow-up (range 10 weeks to 2 years). We did not find any evidence of a difference between statins and fibrates for cardiovascular mortality (OR 2.35, 95% CI 0.94-5.86, I2 = 0%; ten studies, n = 2657; low certainty), major cardiovascular events (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80-1.65, I2 = 13%; 19 studies, n = 7619; low certainty), and myalgia (OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.95-1.83, I2 = 0%; ten studies, n = 6090; low certainty). Statins had less serious adverse effects (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.91, I2 = 0%; nine studies, n = 3749; moderate certainty), less elevations in serum creatinine (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.08-0.36, I2 = 0%; six studies, n = 2553; high certainty), and more elevations in alanine aminotransferase (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.03-1.99, I2 = 44%; seven studies, n = 5225; low certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

The eligible randomized trials of statins versus fibrates were designed to assess short-term lipid outcomes, making it difficult to have certainty about the direct comparative effect on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality. With the exception of myalgia, use of a statin appeared to have a lower incidence of adverse effects compared to use of a fibrate.

Fibrate pharmacogenomics: expanding past the genome

Fibrates are a medication class prescribed for decades as 'broad-spectrum' lipid-modifying agents used to lower blood triglyceride levels and raise high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Such lipid changes are associated with a decrease in cardiovascular disease, and fibrates are commonly used to reduce risk of dangerous cardiovascular outcomes. As with most drugs, it is well established that response to fibrate treatment is variable, and this variation is heritable. This has motivated the investigation of pharmacogenomic determinants of response, and multiple studies have discovered a number of genes associated with fibrate response. Similar to other complex traits, the interrogation of single nucleotide polymorphisms using candidate gene or genome-wide approaches has not revealed a substantial portion of response variation. However, recent innovations in technological platforms and advances in statistical methodologies are revolutionizing the use and integration of other 'omes' in pharmacogenomics studies. Here, we detail successes, challenges, and recent advances in fibrate pharmacogenomics.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Fixed Dose Combination of Rosuvastatin and Choline Fenofibrate to Fixed Dose Combination of Rosuvastatin and Fenofibrate in Patients of Mixed Dyslipidemia: A Randomized, Open-label, Multicentre Clinical Trial in Indian Population

INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of fixed-dose combination (FDC) of rosuvastatin and choline fenofibrate in comparison to rosuvastatin and fenofibrate FDC among Indian patients of mixed dyslipidemia. This would be a first study evaluating FDC of rosuvastatin and choline fenofibrate in Indian population.

METHODS

A multicenter, open-label, randomized, active controlled, comparative, parallel-design study was conducted at 12 centers spread all across India. Mixed dyslipidemic patients aged 18-70 years were randomized to FDC of rosuvastatin 10 mg and choline fenofibrate 135 mg (RCF group) and FDC of rosuvastatin 10 mg and fenofibrate 160 mg (RF group) once daily for approximately 180 days. The primary endpoint of study was percentage change in serum triglyceride level at the end of study from baseline.

RESULTS

Of 290 patients screened, 240 patients were enrolled in this study (120 patients in each group). At the end of 180 days, there was a significant reduction in triglyceride level in both the groups (-37.7% in RCF group and -37.8% reduction in RF group; P < 0.0001 for both); however, the difference between both the groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.94). Similarly, there was significant increase (P < 0.0001 for both) in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in both groups (+17.8% in RCF group and +14.9% in rosuvastatin fenofibrate RF group). Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), very low-LDL (VLDL-C), and total cholesterol were also reduced significantly in both groups (P < 0.0001). However, the difference between two groups for increase in HDL-C and decrease in LDL-C, VLDL-C, and total cholesterol was not significant. Both the treatments were safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Overall, FDC of rosuvastatin and choline fenofibrate is as safe and effective as rosuvastatin and fenofibrate combination in Indian patients with mixed dyslipidemia with added advantage improved patient compliance as it can be taken irrespective of intake of food.

Association of statin use and hypertriglyceridemia with diabetic macular edema in patients with type 2 diabetes and diabetic retinopathy

Background

To investigate the effects of dyslipidemia and statin therapy on progression of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

The medical records of 110 patients with type 2 diabetes (70 statin users and 40 non-users) were retrospectively reviewed. The two outcome measures were progression of diabetic retinopathy by two or more steps on the early treatment diabetic retinopathy study scale and diabetic macular edema based on optical coherence tomography. Serum lipid profiles were analyzed from 6 months prior to diagnosis of diabetic macular edema.

Results

Diabetic retinopathy progressed in 23% of statin users and 18% of non-users (p = 0.506), but diabetic macular edema was present in 23% of statin users and 48% of non-users (p = 0.008). Statins reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in patients with and without diabetic macular edema (p = 0.043 and p = 0.031, respectively). Among statin users, patients with diabetic macular edema had higher levels of triglycerides (p = 0.004) and lower levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (p = 0.033) than those without diabetic macular edema. Logistic regression analysis showed that statin use significantly lowered the risk of diabetic macular edema [odds ratio (OR): 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12–0.91, p = 0.032]. Hypertriglyceridemia at 6 months prior to development of macular edema was significantly associated with central retinal thickness (OR: 1.52; 95% CI 1.14–2.02, p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Lipid lowering therapy with statins protected against the development of diabetic macular edema and progression of diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes. Hypertriglyceridemia could be used as a surrogate marker for diabetic macular edema.

Prescription omega-3 fatty acid products: considerations for patients with diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and metabolic syndrome contribute to hypertriglyceridemia, which may increase residual risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with elevated triglyceride (TG) levels despite optimal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels with statin therapy. Prescription products containing the long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (OM3FAs) eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are an effective strategy for reducing TG levels. This article provides an overview of prescription OM3FAs, including relevant clinical data in patients with T2DM and/or metabolic syndrome. Prescription OM3FAs contain either combinations of DHA and EPA (omega-3-acid ethyl esters, omega-3-carboxylic acids, omega-3-acid ethyl esters A) or EPA alone (icosapent ethyl). These products are well tolerated and can be used safely with statins. Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that all prescription OM3FAs produce statistically significant reductions in TG levels compared with placebo; however, differential effects on LDL-C levels have been reported. Products containing DHA may increase LDL-C levels, whereas the EPA-only product did not increase LDL-C levels compared with placebo. Because increases in LDL-C levels may be unwanted in patients with T2DM and/or dyslipidemia, the EPA-only product should not be replaced with products containing DHA. Available data on the effects of OM3FAs in patients with diabetes and/or metabolic syndrome support that these products can be used safely in patients with T2DM and have beneficial effects on atherogenic parameters; in particular, the EPA-only prescription product significantly reduced TG, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, Apo B, remnant lipoprotein cholesterol, and high-sensitivity CRP levels without increasing LDL-C levels compared with placebo. Ongoing studies of the effects of prescription OM3FAs on cardiovascular outcomes will help determine whether these products will emerge as effective add-on options to statin therapy for reduction of residual cardiovascular disease risk.

Switching statin-treated patients from fenofibrate to the prescription omega-3 therapy icosapent ethyl: a retrospective case series

Introduction

Patients receiving statin therapy for dyslipidaemia often require treatment with an additional agent to control triglyceride levels. Options for add-on therapy include fibrates and omega-3 fatty acids. This case series describes the effects of switching add-on therapy from fenofibrate to icosapent ethyl (the ethyl ester of the omega-3 fatty acid, eicosapentaenoic acid) on patient lipid profiles.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of patient records from a private medical practice in western New York. Statin-treated patients with dyslipidaemia who had been treated with fenofibrate and later switched to icosapent ethyl were selected for analysis. Lipid profiles before and after the switch to icosapent ethyl were compared.

Results

The records of five patients were analysed. All patients had hypertension and were overweight, male, and at high cardiovascular risk. After the switch to icosapent ethyl (treatment duration 3.9–5.8 months), triglyceride levels decreased in four patients, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and total cholesterol levels decreased in all patients. High-density lipoprotein levels increased in four patients. Icosapent ethyl was well tolerated.

Conclusions

Switching from fenofibrate to icosapent ethyl as add-on to a statin therapy due to clinical need may provide an option for patients to maintain or improve lipid parameters.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of choline fenofibrate (fenofibric acid) to micronized fenofibrate in patients of mixed dyslipidemia: A randomized, open-label, multicenter clinical trial in Indian population

INTRODUCTION

Choline fenofibrate is a newly developed choline salt of fenofibric acid, which is more hydrophilic than fenofibrate. This study was initiated to evaluate the safety and efficacy of choline fenofibrate in comparison to micronized fenofibrate among Indian patients of mixed dyslipidemia.

METHODS

A multicenter, open-label, randomized, active controlled, comparative, parallel group study was conducted at around 10 centers spread all across the country. Mixed dyslipidemia patients (serum triglycerides [TG] levels between 150 and 500 mg/dl), aged 18-70 years and taking stable statin dose for 8 weeks were randomized to choline fenofibrate 135 mg delayed release tablets and micronized fenofibrate 160 mg tablets once daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint of the study was percentage change in serum TG level at the end of 12 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 226 patients were enrolled in this study, of which 116 patients were administered choline fenofibrate and 110 patients were administered micronized fenofibrate. At the end of 12 weeks, there was a significant reduction in TG level (34.24% in choline fenofibrate group and 38.13% reduction in micronized fenofibrate group). However, the difference between group was not statistically different (P = 0.471). Similarly, there was a significant increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol at the end of 12 weeks (10% increase in choline fenofibrate group and 9% increase in micronized fenofibrate group); but the difference between the group was not statistically significant (P = 0.598). Both the treatment was safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Choline fenofibrate delayed release 135 mg is as safe and effective as 160 mg of micronized fenofibrate in Indian patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of dual therapy with fenofibrate or fenofibric acid and a statin versus a double or equivalent dose of statin monotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of fenofibrate and statin dual therapy versus a double or equivalent dose of statin monotherapy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search and meta-analysis was performed for publications before 1 January 2014 in MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews, among others.

RESULTS

The difference in percentage change from baseline was in favor of dual therapy versus a double dose of statin monotherapy for triglycerides (difference -20%; standard error [SE] 2.6%) and HDL-C (8.7%; SE 1.2%), but not for LDL-C (8.4%; SE 1.5%), non-HDL-C (2.8%; SE 1.1%), total cholesterol (4.5%; SE 1.0%) and apolipoprotein B (2.6%; SE 1.1%). For high intensity statins, the difference in percentage change from baseline was in favor of dual therapy versus equivalent statin monotherapy for triglycerides (-17%; SE 2.6%) and for HDL-C (8.7%; SE 1.9%). The difference in percentage change from baseline for LDL-C was 6% (SE 1.7%), implying a greater reduction in LDL-C with statin monotherapy. For moderate intensity statins, the difference in percentage change from baseline was in favor of dual therapy versus equivalent statin monotherapy for triglycerides (-24.2%; SE 1.2%) and HDL-C (8.2%; SE 0.9%). LDL-C decreased 2.2% (SE 1.4%) more with dual therapy.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

When aiming to change HDL-C or triglycerides, dual therapy is to be preferred to doubling the statin dose; conversely, doubling the statin dose is to be preferred when aiming to reduce LDL-C. If the aim is both to change HDL-C or triglycerides and to reduce LDL-C, the importance of the three outcomes may need to be weighed depending on the intensity of the statin. Combining high intensity statin therapy with fenofibrate improves the effect on HDL-C and triglycerides, but lowers the effect on LDL-C. Combining a moderate intensity statin with fenofibrate improves the effect on HDL-C and triglycerides without reducing the effect on LDL-C. There is a need for long-term randomized clinical trials to compare dual therapy versus doubling the statin dose to assess the importance of improvement in HDL-C and triglycerides versus improvement in LDL-C in terms of cardiovascular outcomes. Further, the addition of ezetimibe to statin/fenofibrate therapy may be of interest.

Lipid-lowering efficacy of rosuvastatin

BACKGROUND

Rosuvastatin is one of the most potent statins and is currently widely prescribed. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of rosuvastatin on blood lipids.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of rosuvastatin on serum total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, non-HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides in participants with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease. Secondary objectives To quantify the variability of the effect of various doses of rosuvastatin.To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in the randomized placebo-controlled trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 10 of 12, 2014 in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to October week 5 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 2014 week 44), Web of Science Core Collection (1970 to 5 November 2014) and BIOSIS Citation Index (1969 to 31 October 2014). No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of rosuvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included and extracted data. WDAEs information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials.

MAIN RESULTS

One-hundred and eight trials (18 placebo-controlled and 90 before-and-after) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of rosuvastatin in 19,596 participants. Rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg/day caused LDL-cholesterol decreases of 46% to 55%, when all the trials were combined using the generic inverse variance method. The quality of evidence for these effects is high. Log dose-response data over doses of 1 to 80 mg, revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol. When compared to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin was about three-fold more potent at reducing LDL-cholesterol. There was no dose-related effect of rosuvastatin on blood HDL-cholesterol, but overall, rosuvastatin increased HDL by 7%. There is a high risk of bias for the trials in this review, which would affect WDAEs, but unlikely to affect the lipid measurements. WDAEs were not statistically different between rosuvastatin and placebo in 10 of 18 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 0.84; 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.47).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The total blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of rosuvastatin was linearly dependent on dose. Rosuvastatin log dose-response data were linear over the commonly prescribed dose range. Based on an informal comparison with atorvastatin, this represents a three-fold greater potency. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with rosuvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 44% of the placebo-controlled trials.

Rare LPL gene variants attenuate triglyceride reduction and HDL cholesterol increase in response to fenofibric acid therapy in individuals with mixed dyslipidemia

OBJECTIVE

Individuals with mixed dyslipidemia have elevated triglycerides (TG), low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and increased risk for coronary disease. Fibrate therapy is commonly used to lower TG and increase HDL-C. Common genetic variants are known to affect the response to fibrate therapy. We sought to identify rare genetic variants (frequency ≤ 1%) in genes involved in TG and HDL-C metabolism that affect the response to fenofibric acid (FA) therapy.

METHODS

Four genes with a major role in HDL-C and TG metabolism APOA1, APOC2, APOC-III and LPL were sequenced in 2385 participants with mixed dyslipidemia in a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study comparing therapy with FA alone, in combination with statins, or statin alone. Rare variants collapsing or SKAT methods were used for the analysis.

RESULTS

Synonymous rare variants in the LPL gene were significantly associated with absolute HDL-C change (P = 9 × 10(-4)) and TG percent change (P = 6.76 × 10(-4)) in those treated with FA only. Participants with these rare variants had a 2 mg/dL increase in HDL-C and 39 mg/dL decrease in TG as compared to 6.2 mg/dL increase in HDL-C and 100 mg/dL decrease in TG in those without these variants. Rare variants in the APOC-III gene were associated with a modest 3 mg/dL less reduction in APOB (P = 8.72 × 10(-4)) in those receiving FA and statin.

CONCLUSION

In individuals with mixed dyslipidemia rare synonymous variants within LPL gene were associated with attenuated response to FA therapy while APOCIII rare variants were associated with a modest effect on APOB response to FA-statin therapy. These results should be replicated in a similar clinical trial for further confirmation.

New peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor agonists: potential treatments for atherogenic dyslipidemia and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

INTRODUCTION

Novel peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) modulators (selective PPAR modulators [SPPARMs]) and dual PPAR agonists may have an important role in the treatment of cardiometabolic disorders owing to lipid-modifying, insulin-sensitizing and anti-inflammatory effects.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the efficacy of new PPAR agonists and SPPARMs that are under development for the treatment of atherogenic dyslipidemia and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

EXPERT OPINION

ABT-335 is a new formulation of fenofibrate that has been approved for concomitant use with statins. K-877, a SPPARM-α with encouraging preliminary results in modulating atherogenic dyslipidemia, and INT131, a SPPARM-γ with predominantly insulin-sensitizing actions, may also have favorable lipid-modifying effects. Although the development of dual PPAR-α/γ agonists (glitazars) and the SPPARM-δ GW501516 has been abandoned because of safety issues, another SPPARM-δ (MBX-8025) and a dual PPAR-α/δ agonist (GFT-505) have shown promising efficacy in decreasing plasma triglyceride and increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations, as well as improving insulin sensitivity and liver function. The beneficial effects of GFT-505 are complemented by preclinical findings that indicate reduction of hepatic fat accumulation, inflammation and fibrosis, making it a promising candidate for the treatment of NAFLD/nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Long-term trials are required to test the efficacy and safety of these new PPAR agonists in reducing cardiovascular outcomes and treating NAFLD/NASH.

Effect of ABT-335 (fenofibric acid) on meal-induced oxidative stress in patients with metabolic syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Examine the effect of ABT-335 (fenofibric acid) on postprandial lipemia and susceptibility of plasma lipoproteins to Cu(++)-mediated oxidation in patients with metabolic syndrome.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This is a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled study with cross-over and includes a 4-week wash-out period between the two treatment periods. At the end of each 8-week treatment period, subjects were challenged with a standardized mixed meal followed by blood collection over the ensuing 6 h. Plasma lipoproteins were isolated by a combination of ultracentrifugation and FPLC for the continuous monitoring of conjugated dienes formation as an assessment of oxidative susceptibility. Fasting plasma TG was reduced by 20% (p < 0.0002) and there was a modest reduction in hsCRP (6.1%, p < 0.06). There was no change in either HDLc or LDLc in these subjects. Postprandial lipemia was reduced with ABT-335 as demonstrated by a 28.5% reduction (p < 0.0005) in incremental area under the curve for TG during the 6-h period after the meal challenge. Lag times for both fasting LDL (+16%) and postprandial LDL (+28%) were increased with the ABT-335 therapy, suggestive of reduced oxidative susceptibility. Co-incubation with autologous HDL did not reduced LDL oxidative susceptibility in these patients.

CONCLUSION

ABT-335 therapy reduced fasting and postprandial triglycerides in patients with metabolic syndrome. Autologous HDL may be dysfunctional in these patients as co-incubation with HDL failed to reduce oxidative susceptibility of LDL. During ABT-335 therapy, LDL was less susceptible to Cu(++)-mediated oxidative modification, in spite of the lack of changes in LDLc levels.

Does combination therapy with statins and fibrates prevent cardiovascular disease in diabetic patients with atherogenic mixed dyslipidemia?

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with the development and progression of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Statins have an established efficacy in the management of dyslipidemia primarily by decreasing the levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and thus decreasing CVD risk. They also have a favorable safety profile. Despite the statin-mediated benefit of CVD risk reduction a residual CVD risk remains, especially in T2DM patients with high triglyceride (TG) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) values. Fibrates decrease TG levels, increase HDL-C concentrations, and improve many other atherosclerosis-related variables. Fibrate/statin co-administration improves the overall lipoprotein profile in patients with mixed dyslipidemia and may reduce the residual CVD risk during statin therapy. However, limited data exists regarding the effects of statin/fibrate combination on CVD outcomes in patients with T2DM. In the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) study the statin/fibrate combination did not significantly reduce the rate of CVD events compared with simvastatin/placebo in patients with T2DM. However, it did show a possible benefit in a pre-specified analysis in the subgroup of patients with high TG and low HDL-C levels. Furthermore, in the ACCORD study the simvastatin/fenofibrate combination significantly reduced the rate of progression of retinopathy compared with statin/placebo administration in patients with T2DM. The present review presents the available data regarding the effects of statin/fibrate combination in patients with T2DM and atherogenic mixed dyslipidemia.

A Review of Currently Available Fenofibrate and Fenofibric Acid Formulations

Fenofibrate is a third-generation fibric acid derivative indicated as a monotherapy to reduce elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and apolipoprotein B; to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia; and to reduce triglycerides in patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia. In this review, the key characteristics of available fenofibrate formulations are examined. A literature search was conducted, focusing on comparative studies examining bioavailability, food effects, absorption, and lipid efficacy. Fenofibrate is highly lipophilic, virtually insoluble in water, and poorly absorbed. Coadministration with meals was necessary to maximize bioavailability of early formulations. Micronized and nanoparticle formulations of fenofibrate with reduced particle sizes were developed, resulting in greater solubility, improved bioavailability, and in some cases, the ability to be given irrespective of food. A recently introduced hydrophilic choline salt of fenofibric acid also can be taken without regard to meals, is absorbed throughout the gastrointestinal tract, has the highest bioavailability among marketed formulations, and is approved for coadministration with a statin. Differences in bioavailability of fenofibrate formulations have resulted in low-dose (40 - 67) mg and standard-dose (120 - 200 mg) formulations. Different formulations are not equivalent on a milligram-to-milligram basis. In order to prevent medication errors, resulting in underdosing or overdosing with attendant consequences, it is important for healthcare providers to recognize that the formulations of fenofibrate and fenofibric acid that are currently available vary substantially in relation to food effect, equivalency on a milligram-to-milligram basis, and indication to be coadministered with a statin.

Adverse events of statin-fenofibric acid versus statin monotherapy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with mixed dyslipidemia can benefit from the combination of fenofibric acid (FA) with statins, but concerns about adverse events make physicians reluctant to prescribe the combination therapy.

OBJECTIVE

In the present study, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the efficacy and adverse events in patients taking statins and FA.

METHODS

Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify studies that reported adverse events. Finally, five trials covering 2704 patients were selected in this study.

RESULTS

There were significant decreases in TG and increases in HDL-C in patients receiving combination therapy compared with statin monotherapy. The incidence of hepatic toxicity (OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.17-10.83; P < 0.05) and increased creatinine (OR, 3.22; 95% CI, 1.28-8.11; P < 0.05) was significantly higher in the FA + low-dose statin group than in the corresponding statin monotherapy. The incidence of CK elevations and muscle-associated AEs was not statistically different between the two groups. The adverse events in the FA + moderate-dose statin group were almost identical to those in the FA + low-dose statin group.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, combination therapy could improve the blood lipid profile. Addition of FA to statins therapy is more frequently associated with hepatic and renal toxicity than muscle-associated AEs. Therefore patients taking the combination of FA with statins should have liver enzyme and renal function monitored. However, we still need large-scale and long follow-up period RCTs to definitively confirm the adverse events of FA-statin therapy.

Study design, rationale, and baseline characteristics: evaluation of fenofibric acid on carotid intima-media thickness in patients with type IIb dyslipidemia with residual risk in addition to atorvastatin therapy (FIRST) trial

PURPOSE

Elevated triglycerides (TG) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels contribute to cardiovascular disease risk and can be effectively treated with fenofibric acid. A trial is under way to evaluate the effect of once-daily fenofibric acid or placebo on carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) progression in patients with controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels achieved through atorvastatin treatment, but with high TG and low HDL-C levels.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind study, 682 patients were randomized to once-daily delayed-release capsules of choline fenofibrate 135 mg (fenofibric acid [Trilipix(®); Abbott, North Chicago, IL]) or placebo plus atorvastatin treatment after a 2- to 10-week diet and atorvastatin run-in period. Key inclusion criteria included age ≥45 years; posterior-wall common CIMT ≥0.7 mm on at least one side at baseline; fasting results of TG ≥150 mg/dL, and HDL-C ≤45 mg/dL for men or HDL-C ≤55 mg/dL for women at screening while receiving atorvastatin; controlled LDL-C; and known coronary heart disease (CHD) or a CHD risk equivalent. The primary efficacy variable is the rate of change from baseline through week 104 in the mean posterior-wall intima-media thickness of the common carotid arteries (composite value of left and right sides).

CONCLUSIONS

This trial is the first to examine the effect of fenofibric acid on CIMT and the first CIMT trial to select patients with controlled LDL-C and elevated TG and low HDL-C as inclusion criteria. Also, this trial will prospectively evaluate the effect of treatment on LDL particles and address shortcomings of previous CIMT trials.

A review of time courses and predictors of lipid changes with fenofibric acid-statin combination

Fibrates activate peroxisome proliferator activated receptor α and exert beneficial effects on triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and low density lipoprotein subspecies. Fenofibric acid (FA) has been studied in a large number of patients with mixed dyslipidemia, combined with a low- or moderate-dose statin. The combination of FA with simvastatin, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin resulted in greater improvement of the overall lipid profile compared with the corresponding statin dose. The long-term efficacy of FA combined with low- or moderate- dose statin has been demonstrated in a wide range of patients, including patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, or elderly subjects. The FA and statin combination seems to be a reasonable option to further reduce cardiovascular risk in high-risk populations, although trials examining cardiovascular disease events are missing.

Interaction between SNPs in the RXRA and near ANGPTL3 gene region inhibits apoB reduction after statin-fenofibric acid therapy in individuals with mixed dyslipidemia

The mixed dyslipidemia phenotype is characterized by elevated triglycerides (TG), low HDL cholesterol (HDL-C), increased ApoB levels, and premature coronary atherosclerosis. Fibrate-statin combination therapy reduces ApoB levels and coronary events in the mixed dyslipidemia population. We sought to identify gene-gene interactions that affect ApoB response to statin-fenofibric acid therapy in the mixed dyslipidemia population. Using a predefined subset of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that were previously associated with TG, VLDL, or HDL-C, we applied gene-gene interaction testing in a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial examining the response to fenofibric acid (FNA) and its combination with statin in 1,865 individuals with mixed dyslipidemia. Of 11,783 possible SNP pairs examined, we detected a single significant interaction between rs12130333, located within the ANGPTL3 gene region, and rs4240705, within the RXRA gene, on ApoB reduction after statin-FNA therapy (P = 4.0 × 10(-6)). ApoB response to therapy gradually reduced with the increasing number of T alleles in the rs12130333 but only in the presence of the GG genotype of rs4240705. Individuals doubly homozygous for the minor alleles at rs12130333 and rs4240705 showed a paradoxical increase of 1.8% in ApoB levels after FNA-statin combination therapy. No gene-gene interaction was identified other than an interaction between SNPs in the ANGPTL3 and RXRA regions, which results in the inhibition of ApoB reduction in response to statin-FNA therapy. Further study is required to examine the clinical applicability of this genetic interaction and its effect on coronary events.

Fenofibric acid for hyperlipidemia

INTRODUCTION

3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (i.e., statins) are the mainstay of therapy for hyperlipidemia, as per the current National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) recommendation. However, the role of other agents, such as the fibrates, is continually being debated in the context of incremental risk reduction, especially in the setting of mixed dyslipidemia. Results from the ACCORD Trial have further added to the confusion. Fibrates also have a role to play in familial hyperlipidemias and in hypertriglyceridemia. Fenofibric acid is one of the newly approved forms of fenofibrate with enhanced bioavailability and was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administation (FDA) for the treatment of various types of hyperlipidemia, in conjunction with statins.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the role of fenofibric acid in the context of results from recent randomized trials on fenofibrate, including the ACCORD Trial. It discusses the current status of fenofibric acid in the management of dyslipidemia, especially in combination with statins, and also addresses the comparative efficacy and safety profile of this new molecule against other agents in its class.

EXPERT OPINION

Fenofibric acid in combination with low- to moderate-dose statins is an effective and safe option in the treatment of mixed dyslipidemia, although the long-term effects on cardiovascular risk reduction need to be explored further.

Attainment of goal/desirable lipid levels in patients with mixed dyslipidemia after 12 weeks of treatment with fenofibric acid and rosuvastatin combination therapy: a pooled analysis of controlled studies

BACKGROUND

Goal/desirable lipid levels are underachieved in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. These patients may have substantial residual risk of cardiovascular disease even while receiving optimal LDL-C-lowering therapy and may require additional therapy to improve multiple lipid/lipoprotein levels.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate attainment of goal/desirable levels of lipids/lipoproteins after 12-week treatment with combination rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid versus rosuvastatin monotherapy.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of patients with mixed dyslipidemia who enrolled in one of two randomized controlled trials, and were treated (N = 2066) with rosuvastatin (5, 10, or 20 mg), fenofibric acid 135 mg, or rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid for 12 weeks. Data were pooled across doses of rosuvastatin as monotherapy and combination therapy.

RESULTS

Compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy, combination therapy had comparable effects in achieving risk-stratified LDL-C goals; however, measures of total atherogenic burden were improved because significantly greater percentages of patients attained non-HDL-C goal in high- (62.9% vs 50.4%, P = .006) and moderate-risk groups (87.6% vs 80.4%, P = .016) and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) <90 mg/dL in high-risk group (59.8% vs 43.8%, P < .001). In the overall population, more patients treated with the combination therapy achieved desirable levels of HDL-C >40/50 mg/dL in men/women (P < .001), triglycerides <150 mg/dL (P < .001), and ApoB <90 mg/dL (P < .001), compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy. Furthermore, combination therapy resulted in significantly greater percentages of patients achieving simultaneous specified levels of LDL-C + non-HDL-C (P < .015); LDL-C + HDL-C + TG (P < .001); and LDL-C + HDL-C + triglycerides + non-HDL-C + ApoB (P < .001), compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid may be more efficacious than rosuvastatin alone in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

Rosuvastatin: a review of the pharmacology and clinical effectiveness in cardiovascular disease

Rosuvastatin is a new generation HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor which exhibits some unique pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties. It has low extrahepatic tissue penetration, low potential for CYP3A4 interactions and substantial LDL-C lowering capacity and therefore has distinct advantages. We conducted a Medline literature search to identify rosuvastatin papers published in English. In this review, we outline the pharmacology of rosuvastatin, highlighting its efficacy and safety. We also review the major clinical trials with reference to primary and secondary prevention, familial hypercholesterolaemia and comparison with other statins. Finally we address its place in clinical practice.

Non-lipid effects of rosuvastatin-fenofibrate combination therapy in high-risk Asian patients with mixed hyperlipidemia

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the non-lipid effects of rosuvastatin-fenofibrate combination therapy with rosuvastatin monotherapy in high-risk Asian patients with mixed hyperlipidemia.

METHODS

A total of 236 patients were initially screened. After six weeks of diet and life style changes, 180 of these patients were randomly assigned to receive one of two regimens: rosuvastatin 10 mg plus fenofibrate 160 mg or rosuvastatin 10 mg. The primary outcome variables were the incidences of muscle or liver enzyme elevation. The patients were followed for 24 weeks during drug treatment and for an additional four weeks after drug discontinuation.

RESULTS

The rates of the primary outcome variables were similar between the two groups (2.8% and 3.9% in the combination and the rosuvastatin groups, respectively, p=1.00). The combination group had more, but not significantly, common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) (13.3% and 5.6%, respectively) and drug discontinuation due to AEs (10.0% and 3.3%, respectively) than the rosouvastatin group. Combination therapy was associated with higher elevations in homocysteine, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine, whereas elevation in alanine aminotransferase was greater in the rosuvastatin group. Leukocyte count and hemoglobin level decreased to a greater extent in the combination group. The combination group showed greater reductions in TG and elevation in HDL-cholesterol.

CONCLUSION

In our study population, the rosuvastatin-fenofibrate combination resulted in comparable incidences of myo- or hepatotoxicity as rosuvastatin monotherapy. However, this combination may need to be used with caution in individuals with underlying pathologies such as renal dysfunction (NCT01414803).

Molecular pathology of familial hypercholesterolemia, related dyslipidemias and therapies beyond the statins

The development of the statin class of cholesterol-lowering drugs is one of the most significant success stories of modern pharmacotherapy. World-wide there are an estimated 150 million people on statins, with the emerging economies of India and China predicted to contribute significantly to that number. Notwithstanding their success, a significant number of people cannot tolerate statins because of serious side effects; of equal concern, a substantial proportion of high risk patients fail to reach cholesterol-lowering targets. For these subjects there is an urgent need for new cholesterol-lowering agents to be used alone or in combination with statins. The success of statins has been largely underpinned by knowledge of cholesterol homeostasis at a molecular level, knowledge that was first gleaned in the 1980s from Brown and Goldstein's pioneering studies of familial hypercholesterolemia (FH, OMIM 143890). Follow-up work that has identified a number of intracellular and circulating factors, all capable of disrupting LDL clearance, has revealed that the low-density lipoprotein receptor- (LDLR) mediated clearance pathway is substantially more complex than previously thought. These factors were discovered in studies of individuals with very rare inherited conditions that lead to either hypo- or hypercholesterolemia. These investigations, besides providing clearer insight into the molecular mechanisms regulating plasma LDL concentrations, have also revealed a number of novel therapeutic targets independent from statins. Consequently, a number of novel therapeutic approaches that are based on small interfering bio-molecules, including antisense oligonucleotides, are now in clinical development. These are aimed at impairing the assembly, synthesis and secretion of apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins and/or accelerating their hepatic catabolism. The aim of this article is to focus on these recent advances in the understanding of the molecular basis of cholesterol metabolism that should herald novel cholesterol-lowering agents beyond the statins.

Incidence of Hospitalized Rhabdomyolysis with Statin and Fibrate Use in an Insured US Population

Background:

The incidence of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis is not well characterized among patients taking statin-fibrate combination therapies.

Objective:

To estimate and compare the rates of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis during periods of exposure to different statins and fibrates.

Methods:

We retrospectively identified a cohort patients who initiated a statin or fibrate between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2007, using a database of a large US hearth insurer. Patients were followed for the occurrence of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis, determined by clinical review of medical records. Exposure status during the study period was determined by electronic records of statin and fibrate dispensing. Incidence rates (IRs) and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for various combinations of fibrate and statin exposure were modeled, using Poisson regression.

Results:

There were 1,116,805 patients who initiated statin and/or fibrate therapy, with 2.4 million person-years of observation. Seventy cases of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis were confirmed. Adjusted analyses showed a persistent increased risk of rhabdomyolysis with combination therapy, while statin and fibrate therapy alone showed similar, nonsignificant increases in risk. The adjusted IRR for a statin and fenofibrate was 3.26 (95% CI 1.21 to 8.60), while the adjusted IRR for a statin and gemfibrozil was 11.93 (95% CI 3.96 to 35.93) versus statin therapy alone. The individual IRs for statin monotherapy ranged from 0.00 to 3.34 per 100,000 person-years. The number needed to harm was tower for combination statin-gemfibrozil therapy (2753) compared with that for statin therapy atone (454,545).

Conclusions:

The incidence of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis is rare, but higher in patients with concomitant statin-fibrate treatment than in patients on statin therapy atone. The rate found in this study is consistent with the known profile of the statin-fibrate treatment option for mixed dyslipidemia.

Variants in the APOA5 gene region and the response to combination therapy with statins and fenofibric acid in a randomized clinical trial of individuals with mixed dyslipidemia

OBJECTIVE

Atherogenic dyslipidemia is highly associated with coronary heart disease and is characterized by elevated triglycerides (TG), low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). The combination of statins and fibrates is a common modality to treat individuals with atherogenic dyslipidemia. We sought to identify single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with HDL-C, TG, and apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA-I) response to combination therapy with statins and fenofibric acid (FA) in individuals with atherogenic dyslipidemia.

METHODS

2228 individuals with mixed dyslipidemia who were participating in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study comparing FA alone, in combination with a statin, or statin alone for a 12-week period, were genotyped for 304 candidate SNPs. A multivariate linear regression analysis for percent change in HDL-C, ApoA-I and TG levels was performed.

RESULTS

SNPs in the apolipoprotein (APO) A5-ZNF259 region rs3741298 (P = 1.8 × 10(-7)), rs964184 (P = 3.6 × 10(-6)), rs651821 (P = 4.5 × 10(-5)), and rs10750097 (P = 1 × 10(-4)), were significantly associated with HDL-C response to combination therapy with statins and FA, with a similar association identified for ApoA-I. A haplotype composed of the minor alleles of SNPs rs3741298, rs964184, and rs10750097, was associated with a positive response to statins and FA (P = 8.7 × 10(-7)) and had a frequency of 18% in the study population.

CONCLUSION

In a population with atherogenic dyslipidemia, common SNPs and haplotypes within the APOA5-ZNF259 region are highly associated with HDL-C and ApoA-I response to combination therapy with statins and FA.

Long-term efficacy of adding fenofibric acid to moderate-dose statin therapy in patients with persistent elevated triglycerides

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of adding fenofibric acid to moderate-dose statin therapy in patients at goal for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) but with persistent hypertriglyceridemia.

Methods

This is a post hoc analysis of a subset of patients (N = 92) with mixed dyslipidemia treated with moderate-dose statin (rosuvastatin 20 mg, simvastatin 40 mg, or atorvastatin 40 mg) for 12 weeks in three controlled trials who had achieved LDL-C <100 mg/dL but whose triglycerides remained >200 mg/dL, and had fenofibric acid 135 mg added to the moderate-dose statin in a 52-week open-label extension study. Lipid and apolipoprotein (Apo) values and the proportion of patients meeting individual and combined treatment targets with combination therapy were determined at scheduled visits during the 52-week study and compared with baseline (start of extension study).

Results

Addition of fenofibric acid to moderate-dose statin for 52 weeks resulted in significant (P < 0.001) improvements in non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non–HDL-C; –9.0%), ApoB (–9.8%), HDL-C (14.9%), and triglycerides (–37.6%) compared with baseline. At final visit, greater proportions of patients achieved optimal levels of individual parameters as well as combined targets of LDL-C + non–HDL-C (60.0% vs 52.2%), LDL-C + non–HDL-C + ApoB (53.3% vs 37.8%, P = 0.007), and LDL-C + non–HDL-C + ApoB + HDL-C + triglycerides (25.6% vs 0.0%) than at baseline.

Conclusions

The addition of fenofibric acid to moderate-dose statin in patients whose LDL-C was optimal but whose triglycerides remained >200 mg/dL led to additional improvements in non–HDL-C, ApoB, HDL-C, and triglycerides that resulted in greater proportions of patients attaining optimal levels of the individual parameters as well as simultaneously achieving optimal levels of these parameters and LDL-C.

Achievement of lipid targets with the combination of rosuvastatin and fenofibric Acid in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Objective

The objective of this study was to assess the proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) attaining individual and combined targets of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG), non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) after treatment with rosuvastatin (R) + fenofibric acid (FA) compared with corresponding-dose R monotherapy.

Methods

This post hoc analysis evaluated data from the T2DM subset of patients with mixed dyslipidemia (LDL-C ≥130 mg/dL, HDL-C <40/50 mg/dL in men/women, and TG ≥150 mg/dL) from 2 randomized studies. Patients included in the analysis (N = 456) were treated with R (5, 10, or 20 mg), FA 135 mg, or R (5, 10, or 20 mg) + FA 135 mg for 12 weeks. Attainment of LDL-C <100 mg/dL, HDL-C >40/50 mg/dL in men/women, TG <150 mg/dL, non-HDL-C <130 mg/dL, ApoB <90 mg/dL, and the combined targets of these parameters was assessed.

Results

Treatment with R + FA resulted in a significantly higher proportion of patients achieving optimal levels of HDL-C (46.8% vs. 20.8%, P = 0.009 for R 10 mg + FA), TG (60.0% vs. 34.0%, P = 0.02 for R 10 mg + FA; 54.0% vs. 26.4%, P = 0.005 for R 20 mg + FA), non-HDL-C (55.1% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.04 for R 5 mg + FA), ApoB (58.0% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.02 for R 5 mg + FA); and the combined targets of LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG (28.3% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.02 for R 10 mg + FA) and all 5 parameters (26.1% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.03 for R 10 mg + FA) than corresponding-dose R monotherapies.

Conclusions

A significantly greater proportion of T2DM patients achieved individual and combined lipid targets when treated with the combination of R + FA than corresponding-dose R monotherapies.

Opening a new lipid "apo-thecary": incorporating apolipoproteins as potential risk factors and treatment targets to reduce cardiovascular risk

Statins (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) represent the cornerstone of drug therapy to reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and cardiovascular risk. However, even optimal statin management of LDL cholesterol leaves many patients with residual cardiovascular risk, in part because statins are more effective in reducing LDL cholesterol than apolipoprotein B (Apo B). Apo B may be a better marker of atherogenic risk than LDL cholesterol because Apo B measures the total number of all atherogenic particles (total atherosclerotic burden), including LDL, very low-density lipoprotein, intermediate-density lipoprotein, remnant lipoproteins, and lipoprotein(a). To determine whether Apo B is a better indicator of baseline cardiovascular risk and residual risk after lipid therapy compared with LDL cholesterol, a MEDLINE search of the literature published in English from January 1, 1975, through December 1, 2010, was conducted. On the basis of data from most population studies, elevated Apo B was more strongly associated with incident coronary heart disease than similarly elevated LDL cholesterol. Apo B was also a superior benchmark (vs LDL cholesterol) of statins' cardioprotective efficacy in both primary-prevention and secondary-prevention trials. To minimize cardiovascular risk among persons with hypercholesterolemia or dyslipidemia, the best available evidence suggests that intensive therapy with statins should be initiated to achieve the lowest possible Apo B level (with adequate drug toleration) and then other therapies (eg, niacin, bile acid resins, ezetimibe) added to potentiate these Apo B-lowering effects. In future consensus lipid-lowering treatment guidelines, Apo B should be considered as an index of residual risk, a potential parameter of treatment efficacy, and a treatment target to minimize risk of coronary heart disease.

Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin 5 mg in combination with fenofibric acid 135 mg in patients with mixed dyslipidemia - a phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Patients with mixed dyslipidemia characterized by elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), elevated triglycerides (TG), and reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) often require combination therapy to improve multiple lipid and nonlipid parameters. This phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin 5 mg coadministered with fenofibric acid 135 mg in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

METHODS

A total of 760 patients with TG ≥ 150 mg/dL, HDL-C <40 mg/dL (<50 mg/dL for women), and LDL-C ≥ 130 mg/dL were randomized for a 12-week treatment period to rosuvastatin 5 mg, fenofibric acid 135 mg, or rosuvastatin 5 mg + fenofibric acid 135 mg. The primary efficacy comparisons were mean percentage changes in HDL-C and TG (rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid vs. rosuvastatin monotherapy), and LDL-C (rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid vs. fenofibric acid monotherapy).

RESULTS

Treatment with rosuvastatin + fenofibric acid resulted in statistically significant greater improvements in HDL-C (23.0% vs. 12.4%; P < 0.001) and TG (-40.3% vs. -17.5%; P < 0.001), compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy; and LDL-C (-28.7% vs. -4.1%; P < 0.001), compared with fenofibric acid monotherapy. All secondary efficacy variables improved with combination therapy. Combination therapy was generally well tolerated with a safety profile consistent with individual monotherapies. No unexpected muscle, hepatic, or renal safety signals were identified with combination therapy versus individual monotherapies.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, rosuvastatin 5 mg + fenofibric acid 135 mg resulted in comprehensive improvements in the lipid profile of patients with mixed dyslipidemia without unanticipated adverse events.

Generation of polyclonal antibody with high avidity to rosuvastatin and its use in development of highly sensitive ELISA for determination of rosuvastatin in plasma

In this study, a polyclonal antibody with high avidity and specificity to the potent hypocholesterolaemic agent rosuvastatin (ROS) has been prepared and used in the development of highly sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for determination of ROS in plasma. ROS was coupled to keyhole limpt hemocyanin (KLH) and bovine serum albumin (BSA) using carbodiimide reagent. ROS-KLH conjugate was used for immunization of female 8-weeks old New Zealand white rabbits. The immune response of the rabbits was monitored by direct ELISA using ROS-BSA immobilized onto microwell plates as a solid phase. The rabbit that showed the highest antibody titer and avidity to ROS was scarified and its sera were collected. The IgG fraction was isolated and purified by avidity chromatography on protein A column. The purified antibody showed high avidity to ROS; IC₅₀ = 0.4 ng/ml. The specificity of the antibody for ROS was evaluated by indirect ELISA using various competitors from the ROS-structural analogues and the therapeutic agents used with ROS in a combination therapy. The proposed ELISA involved a competitive binding reaction between ROS, in plasma sample, and the immobilized ROS-BSA for the binding sites on a limited amount of the anti-ROS antibody. The bound anti-ROS antibody was quantified with horseradish peroxidase-labeled second anti-rabbit IgG antibody (HRP-IgG) and 3,3',5,5'-tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) as a substrate for the peroxidase enzyme. The concentration of ROS in the sample was quantified by its ability to inhibit the binding of the anti-ROS antibody to the immobilized ROS-BSA and subsequently the color intensity in the assay wells. The assay enabled the determination of ROS in plasma at concentrations as low as 40 pg/ml.

Effects of combination therapy with rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid in patients with mixed dyslipidemia and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (≥ 2 mg/L). cmb@bcm.tmc.edu

BACKGROUND

Elevated levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) correlate with an increased risk for cardiovascular events. Combination therapy with a statin and a fibrate may be more effective than statin monotherapy for reducing hsCRP, especially in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the treatment effects of rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid combination therapy compared with individual monotherapies in mixed dyslipidemic patients with baseline hsCRP ≥2 mg/L versus <2 mg/L and to determine the effects of long-term treatment with rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid combination therapy on hsCRP and other lipids for patients with hsCRP ≥2 mg/L after treatment with rosuvastatin monotherapy.

METHODS

Data for the post hoc analysis were derived from two 12-week controlled studies and a 52-week extension study. Patients were treated with fenofibric acid 135 mg; rosuvastatin 5, 10, 20, or 40 mg; or rosuvastatin 5, 10, or 20 mg and fenofibric acid 135 mg in the controlled studies; and with rosuvastatin 20 mg and fenofibric acid 135 mg in the extension study.

RESULTS

In this analysis, 65% (1416/2182) of patients had pretreatment baseline hsCRP ≥2 mg/L. Among all treatment groups, larger decreases in hsCRP were observed in patients with greater baseline hsCRP; however, improvements in other lipids/apolipoprotein were comparable between the baseline hsCRP categories. Among patients with high hsCRP (≥2 mg/L) remaining after 12 weeks of rosuvastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg monotherapy, hsCRP was reduced by ∼36% after switching to rosuvastatin 20 mg and fenofibric acid 135 mg for up to 52 weeks, and ∼36% of patients shifted from hsCRP ≥2 mg/L to <2 mg/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy with rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid may be effective for improving the inflammatory biomarker, hsCRP as well as other lipid abnormalities in patients with mixed dyslipidemia and high hsCRP.

Evaluating optimal lipid levels in patients with mixed dyslipidemia following short- and long-term treatment with fenofibric acid and statin combination therapy: a post hoc analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the achievement of individual and combined lipid and lipoprotein/biomarker targets as specified by treatment guidelines with the combination of fenofibric acid and statin therapy in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

METHODS

Data for the post hoc analyses were derived from three 12-week controlled studies and a 52-week extension study. Patients were treated with fenofibric acid 135 mg; low-, moderate-, or high-dose statin (rosuvastatin 10, 20, or 40 mg; atorvastatin 20, 40, or 80 mg; or simvastatin 20, 40, or 80 mg); or fenofibric acid + low- or moderate-dose statin in the controlled studies; and with fenofibric acid + moderate-dose statin in the extension study. Achievement of risk-stratified low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) targets; and optimal levels of ApoB <90 mg/dL, HDL-C >40/50 mg/dL in men/women, triglycerides (TG) < 150 mg/dL, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein <2 mg/L were assessed.

RESULTS

In the controlled studies, significantly lower percentage of high-risk patients treated with fenofibric acid + moderate-dose statin, and significantly higher percentage of high-risk patients treated with fenofibric acid + low-dose statin, compared with corresponding-dose statin monotherapies, achieved their LDL-C (51.3% vs. 72.9%, p < 0.001) and non-HDL-C targets (53% vs. 38%, p = 0.02), respectively. Among all patients, optimal levels of ApoB, HDL-C, TG, and the combined target of LDL-C + non-HDL-C + ApoB + HDL-C + TG were achieved by higher percentage of patients treated with fenofibric acid + low- and moderate-dose statin versus corresponding dose-statin monotherapies (p ≤ 0.04 for all comparisons). In the extension study, significantly (p < 0.001 for all comparisons) higher percentage of patients had achieved individual and combined targets at final visit, compared with baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with mixed dyslipidemia, short-term treatment with the combination of fenofibric acid and low- or moderate-dose statin resulted in comparable or more patients achieving individual targets of non-HDL-C, ApoB, HDL-C, and TG, and combined targets for these parameters and LDL-C, compared with corresponding-dose statin monotherapy. In the long-term study, the proportion meeting these targets was significant, compared with baseline. Limitations include the post hoc nature of the analysis, and the fact that all patients had mixed dyslipidemia and majority were white, which limits generalization to other populations.

Combination rosuvastatin plus fenofibric acid in a cohort of patients 65 years or older with mixed dyslipidemia: subanalysis of two randomized, controlled studies

BACKGROUND

Coronary heart disease risk increases with advancing age and is further increased in patients with mixed dyslipidemia, characterized by elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and high triglycerides (TG). Combination lipid therapy is an option; however, efficacy and safety data among elderly patients are lacking.

HYPOTHESIS

The combination of rosuvastatin and fenofibric acid (R + FA) results in more comprehensive lipid improvements than corresponding-dose monotherapies, without additional safety concerns, in elderly patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis evaluated data from patients age ≥ 65 years (n = 401) with mixed dyslipidemia (LDL-C ≥ 130 mg/dL, HDL-C < 40 mg/dL [men] or < 50 mg/dL [women], and TG ≥ 150 mg/dL) in 2 randomized studies. Patients included in this analysis received either monotherapy (as R 5, 10, or 20 mg or FA 135 mg), or combination therapy with R (5, 10, or 20 mg) + FA 135 mg, for 12 weeks. Data were pooled and analyzed, and mean/median percent changes in multiple lipid parameters and biomarkers were compared.

RESULTS

Combination therapy decreased LDL-C by 31.8%-47.2% vs 10.6% with FA monotherapy (P < 0.001). Combination therapy also increased HDL-C by 21.9%-27.0% vs 5.9%-9.9% with R monotherapy (P < 0.001), and decreased TG by 48.3%-53.5% vs 20.7%-32.8% with R monotherapy (P < 0.001). In general, safety profiles were consistent between combination therapy and individual monotherapies.

CONCLUSIONS

In these elderly patients with mixed dyslipidemia, R 5, 10, or 20 mg in combination with FA 135 mg improved the overall lipid profile, without new or unexpected safety issues.

Efficacy of fenofibric acid plus statins on multiple lipid parameters and its safety in women with mixed dyslipidemia

The combination of fibrate and statin therapies may be a treatment option for women with multiple lipid abnormalities. We, therefore, initiated the present safety and efficacy analysis to address the paucity of such data in women with mixed dyslipidemia. A total of 1,393 women with mixed dyslipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol ≥ 130 mg/dl, triglycerides [TG] ≥ 150 mg/dl, high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol <50 mg/dl), who had enrolled in any 1 of 3 randomized clinical trials, were evaluated. The eligible women were randomized to receive fenofibric acid plus a low- or moderate-dose statin (combination treatment); or low-, moderate-, or high-dose statin monotherapy; or fenofibric acid monotherapy. With low-dose combination treatment, the baseline HDL cholesterol level increased 20% and TG decreased 46% compared to an 8% HDL cholesterol increase and 20% TG decrease with low-dose statins alone. With the moderate-dose combination, the baseline HDL cholesterol increased 21% and TG decreased 44% compared to an 8% HDL cholesterol increase and 26% TG decrease with moderate-dose statins alone. The reduction in baseline LDL cholesterol with low-dose and moderate-dose combinations (37% and 39%, respectively) was comparable to the reduction with corresponding-dose statins (36% and 43%, respectively). High-dose statins decreased the baseline LDL cholesterol 47%; however, the increase in HDL cholesterol (9%) and decrease in TG (25%) were similar to the changes observed with lower doses of statins. The safety profiles of the combinations were comparable to those of the component therapies. In conclusion, these data suggest that a combination of fenofibric acid and a statin could be considered safe and efficacious for treating women with mixed dyslipidemia.

Dyslipidaemia of obesity, metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes mellitus: the case for residual risk reduction after statin treatment

Dyslipidaemia is frequently present in obesity, metabolic syndrome (MetS) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The predominant features of dyslipidaemia in these disorders include increased flux of free fatty acids (FFA), raised triglyceride (TG) and low high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels, a predominance of small, dense (atherogenic) low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) particles and raised apolipoprotein (apo) B values Posprandial hyperlipidaemia may also be present. Insulin resistance (IR) appears to play an important role in the pathogenesis of dyslipidaemia in obesity, MetS and T2DM. The cornerstone of treatment of this IR-related dyslipidaemia is lifestyle changes and in diabetic patients, tight glycaemic control. In addition to these measures, recent clinical trials showed benefit with statin treatment. Nevertheless, a substantial percentage of patients treated with statins still experience vascular events. This residual vascular risk needs to be addressed. This review summarizes the effects of hypolipidaemic drug combinations (including statins with cholesterol ester protein inhibitors, niacin, fibrates or fish oil, as well as fibrate-ezetimibe combination) on the residual vascular risk in patients with obesity, MetS or T2DM.

'Trig-onometry': non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol as a therapeutic target in dyslipidaemia

Targeting elevations in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) remains the cornerstone of cardiovascular prevention. However, this fraction does not adequately capture elevated triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs; e.g. intermediate-density lipoprotein, very low density lipoprotein) in certain patients with metabolic syndrome or diabetic dyslipidaemia. Many such individuals have residual cardiovascular risk that might be lipid/lipoprotein related despite therapy with first-line agents (statins). Epidemiological evidence encompassing > 100,000 persons supports the contention that non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) is a superior risk factor vs. LDL-C for incident coronary heart disease (CHD) in certain patient populations. In studies with clinical end-points evaluated in the current article, a 1:1 to 1:3 relationship was observed between reductions in non-HDL-C and in the relative risk of CHD after long-term treatment with statins, niacin (nicotinic acid) and fibric-acid derivatives (fibrates); this relationship increased to 1:5 to 1:10 in smaller subgroups of patients with elevated triglycerides and low HDL-C levels. Treatment with statin-, niacin-, fibrate-, ezetimibe-, and omega 3 fatty acid-containing regimens reduced non-HDL-C by approximately 9-65%. In a range of clinical trials, long-term treatment with these agents also significantly decreased the incidence of clinical/angiographic/imaging efficacy outcome variables. For patients with dyslipidaemia, consensus guidelines have established non-HDL-C treatment targets 30 mg/dl higher than LDL-C goals. Ongoing prospective randomised controlled trials should help to resolve controversies concerning (i) the clinical utility of targeting non-HDL-C in patients with dyslipidaemia; (ii) the most efficacious and well-tolerated therapies to reduce non-HDL-C (e.g. combination regimens); and (iii) associations between such reductions and clinical, angiographic, and/or imaging end-points.

Fenofibrate in the treatment of dyslipidemia associated with HIV infection

IMPORTANCE TO THE FIELD

Dyslipidemia is common among HIV-infected patients receiving antiretroviral therapy. A higher risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) is associated with specific antiretroviral medications. The aging of HIV infected people and the intersection of other CHD risk factors have led to the need for developing effective interventions to lower the risk of CHD events.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

The authors review current literature on the use of fenofibrate and related derivatives in HIV-infected people with dyslipidemia using antiretroviral therapy.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Fibrates have been demonstrated to reduce the risk of CHD events in HIV seronegative individuals with mixed results on survival benefits. There are no published studies of CHD outcomes using fibrates in people with HIV infection. Several studies conducted in HIV infected people demonstrate the ability of fenofibrate to lower triglycerides and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels with few adverse events. The authors review the pharmacology and clinical efficacy/safety of the use of fenofibrate in people with HIV infection.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Fenofibrate is a generally safe and useful agent for the treatment of mixed dyslipidemia and hypertriglyceridemia in people with HIV infection though limited data are available particularly on clinical outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of fenofibric acid in combination with atorvastatin and ezetimibe in patients with mixed dyslipidemia

BACKGROUND

Statin and ezetimibe combination therapy may be insufficient to improve lipid and nonlipid parameters beyond low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with mixed dyslipidemia.

METHODS

In this phase 3, multicenter, double-blind study, a total of 543 patients with triglycerides ≥150 mg/dL and <400 mg/dL, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) <40 mg/dL (<50 mg/dL for women), and LDL-C ≥130 mg/dL were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with fenofibric acid 135 mg (FA) or placebo, each coadministered with atorvastatin 40 mg + ezetimibe 10 mg (Atorva/Eze).

RESULTS

Both treatment regimens lowered LDL-C by >50%; however, FA + Atorva/Eze resulted in significantly (P < .001) greater improvements in HDL-C (13.0% vs 4.2%), triglycerides (-57.3% vs -39.7%), non-HDL-C (-55.6% vs -51.0%), and apoprotein B (-49.1% vs -44.7%) compared with Atorva/Eze. Overall, adverse events were similar in the 2 treatment groups. No unexpected muscle, hepatic, or renal safety signals were identified with either treatment combination.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with mixed dyslipidemia, the combination of FA + Atorva/Eze significantly improved lipid and nonlipid parameters compared with Atorva/Eze and was generally well tolerated.