Achieving goal lipid levels with ezetimibe plus statin add-on or switch therapy compared with doubling the statin dose. A pooled analysis

Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Fixed-Dose Combination of Simvastatin and Ezetimibe Tablets: A Randomized, Crossover, Open-Label Study in Healthy Volunteers

The current study aimed to evaluate the bioequivalence of a new generic combination of simvastatin and ezetimibe with the reference formulation. An open-label, randomized, 3-period, 3-sequence, crossover study, including 60 healthy volunteers, was implemented. Participants received the test and reference formulation, each containing 20 mg of simvastatin and 10 mg of ezetimibe as a single-dose tablet, separated by a minimum of 2-week washout periods. Blood samples were collected for 20 time points from predose to 72 hours after the dose. The total ezetimibe assay was carried out using a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, while unconjugated ezetimibe, simvastatin, and simvastatin β-hydroxy acid determination was done via a validated ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Each assay was preceded by a liquid-liquid extraction step. The pharmacokinetic parameters were derived using noncompartmental analysis and then compared between the reference and test formulations via a multivariate analysis of variance. No statistical difference was found in under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration and maximum concentration of unconjugated ezetimibe, total ezetimibe, and simvastatin between the reference and test formulations. The 90% confidence intervals of unconjugated ezetimibe, total ezetimibe, and simvastatin natural log-transformed under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration, and maximum concentration were in the range of 80%-125% as per the bioequivalence acceptance criteria. Therefore, the test formulation was bioequivalent to the reference formulation.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Ezetimibe Combination Therapy and High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy in Type 2 Diabetes

CONTEXT

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)-lowering therapy is considerably important in preventing cardiovascular disease (CVD) among patients with diabetes. Studies comparing CVD, stroke, and mortality outcomes of low- or moderate-intensity statins with ezetimibe combination therapy and high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with diabetes remain lacking.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the primary prevention effect of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and all-cause death between combination therapy of low- or moderate-intensity statins and ezetimibe and high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with diabetes using the Korean National Health Insurance claims database.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥20 years with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidemia were enrolled. The combination therapy of low- or moderate-intensity statin and ezetimibe was compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy after a propensity score-matched analysis. The incidence of composite outcomes consisting of MI, stroke, and all-cause death and each component were analyzed.

RESULTS

In moderate-intensity statin therapy with ezetimibe combination therapy, LDL-C (74 ± 37.9 mg/dL vs 80.8 ± 38.8 mg/dL, P < .001) and the incidence of composite outcomes were lower (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.74-0.98) than those in high-intensity statin monotherapy. Meanwhile, no significant difference was observed in the LDL-C levels and composite outcomes between low-intensity statins with ezetimibe combination therapy and high-intensity statin monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Adding ezetimibe to a moderate-intensity statin in patients with type 2 diabetes has a greater LDL-C-lowering effect and greater primary prevention of composite outcomes than that of high-intensity statin monotherapy.

Low-Intensity Statin Plus Ezetimibe Versus Moderate-Intensity Statin for Primary Prevention: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study in Asian Population

BACKGROUND

While moderate-intensity statin therapy is recommended for primary prevention, statins may not be utilized at a recommended intensity due to dose-dependent adverse events, especially in an Asian population. However, evidence supporting the use of low-intensity statins in primary prevention is limited.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare clinical outcomes between a low-intensity statin plus ezetimibe and a moderate-intensity statin for primary prevention.

METHODS

This population-based retrospective cohort study used the Korean nationwide claims database (2002-2019). We included adults without atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases who received moderate-intensity statins or low-intensity statins plus ezetimibe. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke. The safety outcomes were liver and muscle injuries and new-onset diabetes mellitus (DM). We used standardized inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

In the sIPTW model, 1717 and 36 683 patients used a low-intensity statin plus ezetimibe and a moderate-intensity statin, respectively. In the PSM model, each group included 1687 patients. Compared with moderate-intensity statin use, low-intensity statin plus ezetimibe use showed similar risks of the primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.81-1.12 in sIPTW and HR = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.87-1.56 in PSM model). Low-intensity statin plus ezetimibe use was associated with decreased risks of liver and muscle injuries (subHR [sHR] = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.74-0.96 and sHR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.77-0.97 in sIPTW; sHR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.72, 0.96 and sHR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.72-0.94 in PSM model, respectively). For new-onset DM and hospitalization of liver and muscle injuries, no difference was observed.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Low-intensity statin plus ezetimibe may be an alternative to moderate-intensity statin for primary prevention. Our findings provide evidence on safety and efficacy of statin therapy in Asian population.

Plasma lipids in Pseudoxanthoma Elasticum (PXE) patients: A comparative study with population-based reference values and Non-PXE controls

Background and aims

- Pseudoxanthoma elasticum (PXE) is a rare genetic disease caused by pathogenic mutations in the ABCC6 gene, resulting in low values of inorganic pyrophosphate (PPi). While low PPi is thought to contribute to arterial calcification, it remains unclear whether this fully explains premature calcification in PXE. It has been hypothesized that the ABCC6 gene could be related to dyslipidemia, which could contribute to vascular calcification seen in PXE. The aim of this study is to evaluate the relation between PXE and plasma lipid concentrations in a large cohort of PXE patients compared with reference values for the general population and compared with non-PXE controls.

Methods

- The plasma concentrations of total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, tiglycerides, and LDL-cholesterol of 312 PXE patients were compared to age- and sex-matched modeled data of the general Dutch population. Differences in median lipid levels were compared with Mann-Whitney-U test. Secondly, plasma lipid concentrations of 44 PXE patients were compared to 44 not-genetically related relatives (spouses or friends), with linear models adjusted for age, sex and BMI.

Results

- Total cholesterol in PXE patients was 5.6 [IQR 4.6-6.4] mmol/L versus 5.3 [IQR 4.7-6.0] mmol/L (p < 0.01) in the general population; triglycerides were 1.1 [IQR 0.9-1.7] mmol/L versus 1.0 [0.7-1.4] mmol/L (p < 0.01); HDL-c was 1.4 [IQR 1.2-1.7] mmol/L versus 1.5 [IQR 1.2-1.8] mmol/L (p = 0.03) and LDL-c was 3.3 [IQR 2.7-4.1] mmol/L versus 3.2 [IQR 2.7-3.8] mmol/L (p = 0.01). In the patient control analysis with 44 pairs and age, sex and BMI adjusted, comparison with the non-PXE controls only triglycerides were significantly different (mean difference: 0.38 (0.13-0.63)).

Conclusion

-The lipid profiles of PXE patients are marginally different from the general population or compared to a matched control group, but the differences are unlikely to be clinically relevant. It is therefore unlikely that plasma lipids contribute to the premature vascular calcifications in PXE patients.

Lipid-Lowering Strategies for Primary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in the UK: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

AIM

We aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of four different lipid-lowering strategies for primary prevention of coronary heart disease initiated at ages 30, 40, 50, and 60 years from the UK National Health Service perspective.

METHODS

We developed a microsimulation model comparing the initiation of a lipid-lowering strategy to current standard of care (control). We included 458,692 participants of the UK Biobank study. The four lipid-lowering strategies were: (1) low/moderate-intensity statins; (2) high-intensity statins; (3) low/moderate-intensity statins and ezetimibe; and (4) inclisiran. The main outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each lipid-lowering strategy compared to the control, with 3.5% annual discounting using 2021 GBP (£); incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were compared to the UK willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000-£30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

RESULTS

The most effective intervention, low/moderate-intensity statins and ezetimibe, was projected to lead to a gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 0.067 per person initiated at 30 and 0.026 at age 60 years. Initiating therapy at 40 years of age was the most cost effective for all lipid-lowering strategies, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £2553 (95% uncertainty interval: 1270, 3969), £4511 (3138, 6401), £11,107 (8655, 14,508), and £1,406,296 (1,121,775, 1,796,281) per quality-adjusted life-year gained for strategies 1-4, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were lower for male individuals (vs female individuals) and for people with higher (vs lower) low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol. For example, low/moderate-intensity statin use initiated from age 40 years had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £5891 (3822, 9348), £2174 (772, 4216), and was dominant (i.e. cost saving; -2,760, 350) in female individuals with a low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol of ≥ 3.0, ≥ 4.0 and ≥ 5.0 mmol/L, respectively. Inclisiran was not cost effective in any sub-group at its current price.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol lowering from early ages is a more cost-effective strategy than late intervention and cost effectiveness increased with the increasing lifetime risk of coronary heart disease.

Brazilin from Caesalpinia sappan L. as a Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin Type 9 (PCSK9) Inhibitor: Pharmacophore-Based Virtual Screening, In Silico Molecular Docking, and In Vitro Studies

Background

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) is a crucial regulator of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) levels, as it binds to and degrades the LDL receptor (LDLR) in the lysosome of hepatocytes. Elevated levels of PCSK9 have been linked to an increased LDL-c plasma levels, thereby increasing the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), making it an attractive target for therapeutic interventions. As a way to inhibit PCSK9 action, we searched for naturally derived small molecules which can block the binding of PCSK9 to the LDLR.

Methods

In this study, we carried out in silico studies which consist of virtual screening using an optimized pharmacophore model and molecular docking studies using Pyrx 0.98. Effects of the candidate compounds were evaluated using in vitro PCSK9-LDLR binding assays kit.

Results

Eleven natural compounds that bind to PCSK9 were virtually screened form HerbalDB database, including brazilin. Next, molecular docking studies using Pyrx 0.98 showed that brazilin had the highest binding affinity with PCSK9 at -9.0 (Kcal/mol), which was higher than that of the other ten compounds. Subsequent in vitro PCSK9-LDLR binding assays established that brazilin decreased the binding of PCSK9 to the EGF-A fragment of the LDLR in a dose-dependent manner, with an IC50 value of 2.19 μM.

Conclusion

We have identified brazilin, which is derived from the Caesalpinia sappan herb, which can act as a small molecule inhibitor of PCSK9. Our findings suggest that screening for small molecules that can block the interaction between PCSK9 and the LDLR in silico and in vitro may be a promising approach for developing novel lipid-lowering therapy.

New pharmacological agents and novel cardiovascular pharmacotherapy strategies in 2022

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) remain the leading cause of death worldwide and pharmacotherapy of most of them is suboptimal. Thus, there is a clear unmet clinical need to develop new pharmacological strategies with greater efficacy and better safety profiles. In this review, we summarize the most relevant advances in cardiovascular pharmacology in 2022 including the approval of first-in-class drugs that open new avenues for the treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (mavacamten), type 2 diabetes mellitus (tirzepatide), and heart failure (HF) independent of left ventricular ejection fraction (sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors). We also dealt with fixed dose combination therapies repurposing different formulations of "old" drugs with well-known efficacy and safety for the treatment of patients with acute decompensated HF (acetazolamide plus loop diuretics), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (moderate-dose statin plus ezetimibe), Marfan syndrome (angiotensin receptor blockers plus β-blockers), and secondary cardiovascular prevention (i.e. low-dose aspirin, ramipril and atorvastatin), thereby filling existing gaps in knowledge, and opening new avenues for the treatment of CVD. Clinical trials confirming the role of dapagliflozin in patients with HF and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, long-term evolocumab to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events, vitamin K antagonists for stroke prevention in patients with rheumatic heart disease-associated atrial fibrillation, antibiotic prophylaxis in patients at high risk for infective endocarditis before invasive dental procedures, and vutrisiran for the treatment of hereditary transthyretin-related amyloidosis with polyneuropathy were also reviewed. Finally, we briefly discuss recent clinical trials suggesting that FXIa inhibitors may have the potential to uncouple thrombosis from hemostasis and attenuate/prevent thromboembolic events with minimal disruption of hemostasis.

Lost Therapeutic Benefit of Delayed Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Control in Statin-Treated Patients and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lipid-Lowering Intensification

OBJECTIVES

Attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) therapeutic goals in statin-treated patients remains suboptimal. We quantified the health economic impact of delayed lipid-lowering intensification from an Australian healthcare and societal perspective.

METHODS

A lifetime Markov cohort model (n = 1000) estimating the impact on coronary heart disease (CHD) of intensifying lipid-lowering treatment in statin-treated patients with uncontrolled LDL-C, at moderate to high risk of CHD with no delay or after a 5-year delay, compared with standard of care (no intensification), starting at age 40 years. Intensification was tested with high-intensity statins or statins + ezetimibe. LDL-C levels were extracted from a primary care cohort. CHD risk was estimated using the pooled cohort equation. The effect of cumulative exposure to LDL-C on CHD risk was derived from Mendelian randomization data. Outcomes included CHD events, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), healthcare and productivity costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). All outcomes were discounted annually by 5%.

RESULTS

Over the lifetime horizon, compared with standard of care, achieving LDL-C control with no delay with high-intensity statins prevented 29 CHD events and yielded 30 extra QALYs (ICERs AU$13 205/QALY) versus 22 CHD events and 16 QALYs (ICER AU$20 270/QALY) with a 5-year delay. For statins + ezetimibe, no delay prevented 53 CHD events and gave 45 extra QALYs (ICER AU$37 271/QALY) versus 40 CHD events and 29 QALYs (ICER of AU$44 218/QALY) after a 5-year delay.

CONCLUSIONS

Delaying attainment of LDL-C goals translates into lost therapeutic benefit and a waste of resources. Urgent policies are needed to improve LDL-C goal attainment in statin-treated patients.

Long-term efficacy and safety of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (RACING): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Drug combinations rather than increasing doses of one drug can achieve greater efficacy and lower risks. Thus, as an alternative to high-intensity statin monotherapy, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy can lower LDL cholesterol concentrations effectively while reducing adverse effects. However, evidence from randomised trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes is needed.

METHODS

In this randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) at 26 clinical centres in South Korea were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy (rosuvastatin 10 mg with ezetimibe 10 mg) or high-intensity statin monotherapy (rosuvastatin 20 mg). The primary endpoint was the 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke, in the intention-to-treat population with a non-inferiority margin of 2·0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03044665 and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 14, 2017, and Dec 18, 2018, 3780 patients were enrolled: 1894 patients to the combination therapy group and 1886 to the high-intensity statin monotherapy group. The primary endpoint occurred in 172 patients (9·1%) in the combination therapy group and 186 patients (9·9%) in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (absolute difference -0·78%; 90% CI -2·39 to 0·83). LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 73%, 75%, and 72% of patients in the combination therapy group, and 55%, 60%, and 58% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all p<0·0001). Discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug by intolerance was observed in 88 patients (4·8%) and 150 patients (8·2%), respectively (p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with ASCVD, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy was non-inferior to high-intensity statin monotherapy for the 3-year composite outcomes with a higher proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL and lower intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction.

FUNDING

Hanmi Pharmaceutical.

Lipid-lowering therapy: modern possibilities and real clinical practice

Aim. To monitor the scope and effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) in the out- and inpatient settings among people hospitalized at the National Medical Research Center for Therapy and Preventive Medicine.

Material and methods. Retrospective analysis of randomly selected case records for April-May 2012, 2015 and 2022 (n=658).

Results. From 2012 to 2022, the proportion of outpatients taking statins increased as follows: from 28,8 to 60,4% (from 22,2 to 73,3% for high cardiovascular risk (CVR) and from 34,8 to 91,7% for very high CVR). Patients with very high CVR were significantly more likely to be prescribed high-intensity statin therapy (from 3,8 to 45,8%). Inpatients with high CVR were prescribed statins less often (74,3%) than patients with very high CVR (93,6%). In 2022, compared to 2015, the proportion of inpatients who received combined LLT increased as follows — 8,9 vs 0,5% (p< 0,001). Target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <1,4 mmol/l in 2022 was achieved in 18,2 and 13,6% of outpatients with high and very high CVR, respectively.

Conclusion. Despite increase in the frequency of prescribing and the intensity of statin therapy, by 2022 there remains a large proportion of patients with high and very high CVR who do not receive adequate LLT, which allows them to achieve the target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. It is important to note that modern LLT provides great opportunities for the implementation of clinical guidelines in practice.

Combination Therapy of Ezetimibe and Rosuvastatin for Dyslipidemia: Current Insights

Cardiovascular disease is one of the leading causes of death around the world with various efforts being made to reduce risk in patients through preventive measures. One major method for prevention has been managing cholesterol, particularly low-density lipoprotein to decrease atherosclerotic plaque burden, potentially decreasing future cardiac complications. Statins have been the gold standard therapy for hypercholesterolemia treatment due to their ease of dosing, limited drug interactions, and favorable safety profile. Unfortunately, statin therapy alone is not always effective enough to adequately control a patient’s elevated lipid levels and combination therapy may be warranted. Ezetimibe is commonly added to regimens to help augment cholesterol lowering by inhibiting the absorption of cholesterol. The recent approval of a combination tablet of high-intensity rosuvastatin and ezetimibe has introduced a potentially more beneficial option for cholesterol management in addition to the only available combination of moderate intensity simvastatin and ezetimibe. We aimed to identify potential beneficial effects of ezetimibe by comparing its use in combination with high-intensity rosuvastatin compared to a statin therapy alone or in combination with moderate intensity simvastatin through a literature review. The current evidence indicated that combination therapy outperformed statin monotherapy in reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and patients were more likely to achieve their target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal level. This suggests rosuvastatin/ezetimibe combination holds a potential place in therapy for patients requiring a more aggressive reduction in cholesterol to help prevent atherosclerotic disease.

NPC1L1-dependent transport of 27-alkyne cholesterol in intestinal epithelial cells

Niemann-Pick C1 Like-1 (NPC1L1) mediates the uptake of micellar cholesterol by intestinal epithelial cells and is the molecular target of the cholesterol-lowering drug ezetimibe (EZE). The detailed mechanisms responsible for intracellular shuttling of micellar cholesterol are not fully understood due to the lack of a suitable NPC1L1 substrate that can be traced by fluorescence imaging and biochemical methods. 27-Alkyne cholesterol has been previously shown to serve as a substrate for different cellular processes similar to native cholesterol. However, it is not known whether alkyne cholesterol is absorbed via an NPC1L1-dependent pathway. We aimed to determine whether alkyne cholesterol is a substrate for NPC1L1 in intestinal cells. Human intestinal epithelial Caco2 cells were incubated with micelles containing alkyne cholesterol in the presence or absence of EZE. Small intestinal closed loops in C57BL/6J mice were injected with micelles containing alkyne cholesterol with or without EZE. Alkyne cholesterol esterification in Caco2 cells was significantly inhibited by EZE and by inhibitor of clathrin-mediated endocytosis Pitstop 2. The esterification was similarly reduced by inhibitors of the acyl-CoA cholesterol acyltransferase (ACAT). Alkyne cholesterol efficiently labeled the apical membrane of Caco2 cells and the amount retained on the membrane was significantly increased by EZE as judged by accessibility to exogenous cholesterol oxidase. In mouse small intestine, the presence of EZE reduced total alkyne cholesterol uptake by ∼75%. These data show that alkyne cholesterol acts as a substrate for NPC1L1 and may serve as a nonradioactive tracer to measure cholesterol absorption in both in vitro and in vivo models.

Low dose of ROSuvastatin in combination with EZEtimibe effectively and permanently reduce low density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration independently of timing of administration (ROSEZE): A randomized, crossover study - preliminary results

BACKGROUND

In an attempt to improve low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) level control in patients ineffectively treated with statins, we evaluated the effectiveness of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of 10 mg rosuvastatin and ezetimibe and its relation to the timing of drug administration.

METHODS

A randomized, open label, single center, crossover study involving 83 patients with coronary artery disease and hypercholesterolemia with baseline LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL. In arm I the FDC drug was administered in the morning for 6 weeks, then in the evening for the following 6 weeks and vice versa in arm II. The primary endpoint was the change in LDL-C after 6 and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

The median LDL-C concentration at baseline, after 6 and 12 weeks respectively was: 98.10 mg/dL (Q1;Q3: 85.10;116.80), 63.14 mg/dL (50.70;77.10) and 59.40 mg/dL (49.00;73.30); p < 0.001. LDL-C levels were similar regardless of the timing of drug administration (morning 62.50 mg/dL [50.70;76.00] vs. evening 59.70 mg/dL [48.20;73.80]; p = 0.259], in both time points: 6 week: 63.15 mg/dL (50.75;80.65) vs. 63.40 mg/dL (50.60;74.00), p = 0.775; and 12 week: 62.00 mg/dL (50.20;74.40) vs. 59.05 mg/dL (47.65;66.05), p = 0.362. The absolute change in LDL-C concentration for the morning vs. evening drug administration was - 6 week: -34.6 mg/dL (-56.55; -19.85) (-34.87%) vs. -31.10 mg/dL (-44.20; -16.00) (-35.87%) (p not significant); 12. week: -34.20 mg/dL (-47.8; -19.0) (-37.12%) vs. -37.20 mg/dL (-65.55; -23.85) (-40.06%) (p not significant). The therapy was safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixed-dose combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe significantly and permanently decreases LDL-C regardless of the timing of drug administration.

Association of in-hospital intensive statins dosage and death in arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease with percutaneous coronary intervention: insights of multicentre cohort from China

PURPOSE

In-hospital statin dosage-related effect remains unknown for patients with arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This study aimed to determine the associations of different in-hospital intensive statins dosages with the prognosis for patients in the era of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

From January 2010 to December 2014, consecutive ASCVD patients receiving PCI were enrolled from five centres in China. All the enrolled patients were classified into high-dose (40 mg atorvastatin or 20 mg rosuvastatin) or low-dose (20 mg atorvastatin or 10 mg rosuvastatin) intensive statin group. In-hospital all-cause death was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Of the 7008 patients included in this study, 5248 received low-dose intensive statins (mean age, 64.28 ± 10.39; female, 25.2%), whereas 1760 received high-dose intensive statins (mean age, 63.68 ± 10.59; female, 23.1%). There was no significant difference in the in-hospital all-cause death between the two groups (adjusted OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.43-3.72; P = 0.665). All-cause death was similar between the two groups during the 30-day follow-up period (adjusted HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.55-2.97; P = 0.571). However, the high-dose intensive statins were tightly associated with the reduction in in-hospital dialysis (adjusted OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01-0.81; P = 0.030). Besides, primary analyses were confirmed by subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The in-hospital high-dose intensive statins are not associated with the lower risk of in-hospital or 30-day all-cause death among ASCVD patients undergoing PCI. Given the robust beneficial effect of high-dose intensive statins with in-hospital dialysis, an individualized high-dose intensive statin therapy can be rational in specified populations.

LDL-cholesterol: The lower the better

The reduction of low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-chol) has been associated with a decrease in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. It has been demonstrated that there is no value of LDL-chol below which there ceases to be a preventive benefit with its reduction, and neither has it been observed that there is a higher incidence of secondary effects associated with lower concentrations of LDL-chol. Although there is a wide range of lipid-lowering drugs available, a high percentage of patients do not achieve the desired LDL-chol levels. The high-potency statins reduce the LDL-chol by 15-30%, and can double the percentage of patients that reach their desired level. This combination has shown to be safe and effective in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Another option is the combination of statins with exchange resins, although this requires a more complex management. The inhibition of PCSK9 protein with monoclonal antibodies reduces the LDL-chol by more than 60%, and is effective in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, due to its cost, its use is restricted to patients with ischaemia or familial hypercholesterolaemia that do not achieve the desired levels with conventional drugs. The evidence base as regards the benefit and safety of achieving the desired levels of LDL-chol is very wide and is still increasing. In the next few years, it may be necessary to adjust the intensity of the hypercholesterolaemia treatment to the level of vascular risk of the patients, and to the level of reduction necessary to achieve the therapeutic targets. This will result in a more effective cardiovascular prevention and in a better quality of life, particularly in the large group of patients at higher vascular risk.

Inhibition of human 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl CoA reductase by peptides leading to cholesterol homeostasis through SREBP2 pathway in HepG2 cells

In mammalian cells, human 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR), a rate-limiting endoplasmic reticulum (ER) bonded enzyme, plays a central role in the cholesterol homeostasis via the negative feedback mechanism. The present study indicates that the interactions of novel peptides with the catalytic domain of HMGCR, provides an alternative therapeutic candidate for reducing cholesterol. The potential natural origin of HMGCR peptide inhibitors were filtered from the peptide library using the molecular docking, which revealed three strong candidates for inhibition. This information was used for synthesizing peptides, which were evaluated for inhibition against HMGCR. The stronger docking interactions were confirmed by experimental dissociation constant (K_D) values of 9.1 × 10^-9 M, 1.4 × 10^-8 M and 1.2 × 10^-8 M for peptides NALEPDNRIESEGG (Pep-1), NALEPDNRIES (Pep-2) and PFVKSEPIPETNNE (Pep-3) respectively. The immunological based interactions show a strong evidence of peptide-HMGCR complexes. The LDL uptake showed enhancements after treatments with peptides in the extracellular environment of HepG2 cells, which was further, corroborated through increase in the immunofluorescence signal of the localized LDL-R protein expression on the cell membrane. The results showed that the mRNA and protein expression of transcription factors were significantly up-regulated showing regulation of cholesterol biosynthesis in peptide treated HepG2 cells. The binding of transcription factors, sterol regulatory element (SRE) and cAMP-response element (CRE) on HMGCR promotor further confirms the cholesterol biosynthesis regulation. All the above results suggested a key role of peptide/s in alleviating cholesterol accumulation in tissue via inhibition of rate-limiting HMGCR enzyme.

Ezetimibe in high-risk, previously treated statin patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of lipid efficacy

PURPOSE

While statins are used as first-line treatments for high-risk patients with hypercholesterolemia, statin monotherapy is often insufficient to achieve target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Second-line treatment options include up-titration of statin dose, switching to a more potent statin, or combination therapy, e.g., with ezetimibe. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of adding ezetimibe to simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin monotherapy versus doubling the dosage or switching to a higher-potency statin in a population of patients with hypocholesterolemia at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and who had been previously treated with a statin.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed and evidence bases were established for populations of atorvastatin-, simvastatin-, and rosuvastatin-experienced patients using eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Based on the available data, we constructed networks of evidence and conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) within each statin population. The primary outcome of interest was percent change from baseline in LDL-C. Changes in total cholesterol were explored as a secondary outcome.

FINDINGS

Across all patient populations, 35 RCTs were identified and included in the evidence base. Among patients on simvastatin therapy, the addition of ezetimibe resulted in a mean difference (MD) in LDL-C of - 13.62% (95% CrI - 19.99, - 6.91; see table below) compared to doubling the starting dose of simvastatin. In the population of patients on atorvastatin therapy, the addition of ezetimibe resulted in an MD in LDL-C of - 14.71% (95% CrI - 16.46, - 12.95) compared to doubling the starting dose of atorvastatin. The addition of ezetimibe to rosuvastatin resulted in an MD in LDL-C of - 14.96% (95% CrI - 17.79, - 12.11), compared to doubling the starting rosuvastatin dose. Similar trends were observed for changes in total cholesterol.

IMPLICATIONS

Given the available data, the addition of ezetimibe to ongoing simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin monotherapy offers greater reduction in LDL-C among patients at high risk of CVD compared to doubling the initial statin dose.

LDL cholesterol levels after switch from atorvastatin to rosuvastatin

OBJECTIVE

Initial statin therapy may not always adequately reduce elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Although alternative therapies are available, switching to another statin may be beneficial, especially for those at highest risk of cardiovascular disease and events. This study examined changes in LDL-C levels following a switch from 40/80 mg of atorvastatin (ATV) to 20/40 mg of rosuvastatin (RSV).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from the MarketScan administrative claims databases linked to laboratory values. Patients with or at risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) who switched from ATV 40/80 mg to RSV 20/40 mg and had LDL-C values measured within 90 days before and 30-180 days after the switch were included. The change in LDL-C was quantified for each patient and summarized across all patients and within each switch pattern (e.g. ATV40 to RSV20).

RESULTS

There was a significant mean (SD) decrease in LDL-C of 21% (30%) across the whole sample (N = 136) after switching from ATV to RSV. The greatest decrease occurred in patients who switched from ATV40 to RSV40 (N = 20; -29% [19%]; p < .001). Similar changes were observed overall and within each switch pattern when the analysis was limited to patients who were persistent on RSV in the post-switch period (N = 112; -24% [24%]; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from ATV to RSV was associated with a significant decrease in LDL-C among high-risk patients. Switching between these two high-intensity statins may offer a viable alternative to other treatment modifications aimed at lowering LDL-C in this population.

Efficacy and safety of a combination of red yeast rice and olive extract in hypercholesterolemic patients with and without statin-associated myalgia

Cholesfytol^®, a lipid-lowering dietary supplement with antioxidant and anti-atherosclerotic properties, combines red yeast rice (RYR) and olive extract (5mg hydroxytyrosol equivalent) and represents an alternative for patients who do not wish or are unable to use chemical statins, including individuals with previous statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS). A 2-months observational non-randomized study was performed to evaluate the efficacy, tolerance and safety of Cholesfytol^® (1 tablet/day) in 642 hypercholesterolemic patients (mean age: 59 yrs; total cholesterol (TC) ≥200; LDL-C ≥140mg/dl). Patients were followed by 126 GPs, and included irrespective of SAMS history and/or diabetes. None of the patients were taking statins or other lipid-modifying therapy at inclusion. At baseline, 26% had fasting glucose >100 ≤125mg/dL, and 5% >125mg/dL; 32% (n=194) had a SAMS history; and 21% had atherogenic dyslipidemia (AD). In the entire cohort, pre-treatment TC; non-HDL-C; LDL-C; and TG were 259; 200; 168; 158mg/dL, respectively, and decreased significantly on treatment (-17.5% (TC) and -23.3% (LDL-C)). Fasting glucose and HbA_1c decreased between visits. The reduction in lipids was greater in patients with higher values at baseline. For comparable pre-treatment values, patients with SAMS history had reductions in TC, LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and apoB₁₀₀ slightly less than patients without myalgia. AD patients had greater on-treatment decrease in TG. Overall, 13 patients reported minor side-effects, and 4 patients reporting myalgia had antecedent SAMS. In conclusion, a substantial decrease in LDL-C was obtained with a combination of RYR and olive extract in high-risk hypercholesterolemic patients, without inducing new-onset SAMS.

Cardiovascular risk and dyslipidemia among persons living with HIV: a review

BACKGROUND

Aim of this review is to focus the attention on people living with HIV infection at risk of developing a cardiovascular event. What is or what would be the most suitable antiretroviral therapy? Which statin or fibrate to reduce the risk? How to influence behavior and lifestyles?

DISCUSSION

Prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk remains the first and essential step in a medical intervention on these patients. The lifestyle modification, including smoking cessation, increased physical activity, weight reduction, and the education on healthy dietary practices are the main instruments. Statins are the cornerstone for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. They have been shown to slow the progression or promote regression of coronary plaque, and could also exert an anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effect. However the current guidelines for the use of these drugs in general population are dissimilar, with important differences between American and European ones. The debate between American and European guidelines is still open and, also considering the independent risk factor represented by HIV, specific guidelines are warranted. Ezetimibe reduces the intestinal absorption of cholesterol. It is effective alone or in combination with rosuvastatin. It does not modify plasmatic concentrations of antiretrovirals. A number of experimental new classes of drugs for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia are being studied. Fibrates represent the first choice for treatment of hypertriglyceridemia, however, the renal toxicity of fibrates and statins should be considered. Omega 3 fatty acids have a good safety profile, but their efficacy is limited. Another concern is the high dose needed. Other drugs are acipimox and tesamorelin. Current antiretroviral therapies are less toxic and more effective than regimens used in the early years. Lipodistrophy and dyslipidemia are the main causes of long-term toxicities. Not all antiretrovirals have similar toxicities. Protease Inhibitors may cause dyslipidemia and lipodystrophy, while integrase inhibitors have a minimal impact on lipids profile, and no evidence of lipodystrophy. There is still much to be written with the introduction of new drugs in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiovascular risk among HIV infected patients, interventions on behavior and lifestyles, use of drugs to reduce the risk, and switch in antiretroviral therapy, remain nowadays major issues in the management of HIV-infected patients.

The impact of the time of drug administration on the effectiveness of combined treatment of hypercholesterolemia with Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe (RosEze): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Hypercholesterolemia is one of the main risk factors for cardiovascular disease. The first line treatment for hypercholesterolemia is statin therapy. When the expected low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentration is not achieved, the pharmacotherapy may be extended by combining the statin with the cholesterol absorption inhibitor ezetimibe.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study is designed as a randomized, open-label, single-center, crossover study evaluating the effectiveness of combined therapy with rosuvastatin and ezetimibe for hypercholesterolemia. The study is planned to include 200 patients with hypercholesterolemia ineffectively treated with statins for at least 6 weeks. After enrollment participants are randomized into one of two arms receiving rosuvastatin and ezetimibe. In the first arm the study drug is administered in the morning (8:00 am) for 6 weeks and then in the evening for the next 6 weeks; in the second arm the study drug is administered at first in the evening (8:00 pm) for the first 6 weeks and then in the morning for the following 6 weeks. In order to minimize non-adherence to the treatment, all patients will receive the study drug free of charge. The primary outcome of the study is change in LDL-C at 6 and 12 weeks of the treatment, depending on the time of day of study drug administration. The secondary endpoints include change in total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, triglycerides, apolipoproteins ApoB and Apo AI, non-HDL cholesterol, small, dense (sd)-LDL cholesterol, lipoprotein(a), glucose, glycated hemoglobin, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, and creatine kinase at 6 and 12 weeks of the study drug treatment, as well as assessment of plasma fluorescence using stationary and time-resolved fluorescence spectroscopy at baseline and at 6 and 12 weeks of the therapy.

DISCUSSION

The RosEze trial is expected to demonstrate whether there is a significant difference in the effectiveness of the lipid-lowering therapy in reducing the concentration of cholesterol when the medications are taken in the morning compared with the evening time of day.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02772640 . Registered on 28 March 2016.

Statin-ezetimibe versus statin lipid-lowering therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of intensive statin therapy with ezetimibe-statin combination therapy are still rare at present, especially in Asian population.

METHODS

We enrolled 202 patients who suffered acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between May and July in 2016. Patients were allocated into three groups based on the lipid lowering strategy: moderate-intensity statin group (n=118), ezetimibe combined with moderate-intensity statin group (ezetimibe-statin combination, n=55) and intensive statin group (n=29). The lipid profiles and side effects were analyzed and compared among the patients in three groups at admission, 1 month and 3 months after PCI. The clinical outcomes of the patients were observed through 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

One month after PCI, the level of non-high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (non-HDL-C) was decreased by 41.9%, 21.6% and 29.8% by ezetimibe-statin combination therapy, moderate-intensity statin therapy and intensive statin therapy, respectively (P<0.05). The reduction percentages of TC and LDL-C were significantly higher in ezetimibe-statin combination group than in moderate-intensity statin group (P<0.001). The proportion of patients reaching LDL-C goal was higher in ezetimibe-statin combination group (69.1%, P=0.007) and intensive statin group (67.9%, P=0.047) compared with moderate-intensity statin group (46.9%) at 1 month after PCI. There was no significant difference among the three groups with respect to hepatic enzymes level, creatine kinase (CK) level and incidence of muscle symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The reduction percentage of non-HDL-C was larger in ezetimibe-statin combination group than intensive statin group. This finding suggested that statin/ezetimibe combination therapy could be an alternative to intensive statin therapy in Chinese patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Lupin Peptides Modulate the Protein-Protein Interaction of PCSK9 with the Low Density Lipoprotein Receptor in HepG2 Cells

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) has been recently identified as a new useful target for hypercholesterolemia treatment. This work demonstrates that natural peptides, deriving from the hydrolysis of lupin protein and absorbable at intestinal level, are able to inhibit the protein-protein interaction between PCSK9 and the low density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR). In order to sort out the best potential inhibitors among these peptides, a refined in silico model of the PCSK9/LDLR interaction was developed. Docking, molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and peptide binding energy estimations, by MM-GBSA approach, permitted to select the two best candidates among tested peptides that were synthesized and evaluated for their inhibitory activity. The most active was P5 that induced a concentration dependent inhibition of the PCSK9-LDLR binding, with an IC₅₀ value equal to 1.6 ± 0.33 μM. Tested at a 10 μM concentration, this peptide increased by 66 ± 21.4% the ability of HepG2 cells to take up LDL from the extracellular environment.

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibition: a new therapeutic mechanism for reducing cardiovascular disease risk

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) plays an important role in the regulation of cholesterol homeostasis. By binding to hepatic low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors and promoting their lysosomal degradation, PCSK9 reduces LDL uptake, leading to an increase in LDL cholesterol concentrations. Gain-of-function mutations in PCSK9 associated with high LDL cholesterol and premature cardiovascular disease have been causally implicated in the pathophysiology of autosomal-dominant familial hypercholesterolemia. In contrast, the more commonly expressed loss-of-function mutations in PCSK9 are associated with reduced LDL cholesterol and cardiovascular disease risk. The development of therapeutic approaches that inhibit PCSK9 function has therefore attracted considerable attention from clinicians and the pharmaceutical industry for the management of hypercholesterolemia and its associated cardiovascular disease risk. This review summarizes the effects of PCSK9 on hepatic and intestinal lipid metabolism and the more recently explored functions of PCSK9 in extrahepatic tissues. Therapeutic approaches that prevent interaction of PCSK9 with hepatic LDL receptors (monoclonal antibodies, mimetic peptides), inhibit PCSK9 synthesis in the endoplasmic reticulum (antisense oligonucleotides, siRNAs), and interfere with PCSK9 function (small molecules) are also described. Finally, clinical trials testing the safety and efficacy of monoclonal antibodies to PCSK9 are reviewed. These have shown dose-dependent decreases in LDL cholesterol (44%-65%), apolipoprotein B (48%-59%), and lipoprotein(a) (27%-50%) without major adverse effects in various high-risk patient categories, including those with statin intolerance. Initial reports from 2 of these trials have indicated the expected reduction in cardiovascular events. Hence, inhibition of PCSK9 holds considerable promise as a therapeutic option for decreasing cardiovascular disease risk.

Effect of the Combination of Ezetimibe and Simvastatin on Gluconeogenesis and Oxygen Consumption in the Rat Liver

The aim of this work was to investigate the effects of chronic treatment with the combination of ezetimibe and simvastatin on gluconeogenesis in rat liver. Rats were treated daily for 28 days with the combination of ezetimibe and simvastatin (10/40 mg/kg) by oral gavage. To measure gluconeogenesis and the associated pathways, isolated perfused rat liver was used. In addition, subcellular fractions, such as microsomes and mitochondria, were used for complementary measures of enzymatic activities. Treatment with the combination of simvastatin and ezetimibe resulted in a decrease in gluconeogenesis from pyruvate (-62%). Basal oxygen consumption of the treated animals was higher (+22%) than that of the control rats, but the resulting oxygen consumption that occurred after pyruvate infusion was 43% lower in animals treated with the combination of simvastatin and ezetimibe. Oxygen consumption in the livers from treated animals was completely inhibited by cyanide (electron transport chain inhibitor), but not by proadifen (cytochrome P450 inhibitor). Chronic treatment with ezetimibe/simvastatin decreased the activity of the key enzymes glucose-6-phosphatase and fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase by 59% and 45%, respectively, which is probably the major reason for the decreased gluconeogenesis seen in ezetimibe-/simvastatin-treated rats. It is also possible that part of the effect of this combination on gluconeogenesis and on the oxygen consumption is related to the impairment of mitochondrial energy transduction.

Patient and physician factors influence decision-making in hypercholesterolemia: a questionnaire-based survey

Background

Goal attainment of guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is suboptimal. Little is known about how patient factors influence physicians’ treatment decision-making in hypercholesterolemia. We examined physicians’ treatment recommendations in high-risk patients whose LDL-C remained uncontrolled despite statin monotherapy.

Methods

Physicians completed a questionnaire prior to randomization into period I of a two-period randomized controlled trial evaluating LDL-C goal attainment in patients whose LDL-C remained ≥100 mg/dL after 5 weeks’ treatment with atorvastatin 10 mg/day (NCT01154036). Physicians’ treatment recommendations were surveyed for two hypothetical and one real scenario: (1) LDL-C presumed near goal (between 100–105 mg/dL), (2) LDL-C presumed far from goal (~120 mg/dL), and (3) observed baseline LDL-C of enrolled patients. Prognostic factors considered during decision-making were identified by regression analysis. Observed lipid outcomes at the end of period I (following 6 weeks’ treatment with ezetimibe 10 mg plus atorvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, or rosuvastatin 10 mg) were compared with estimated LDL-C outcomes for physicians’ treatment recommendations after 6 weeks (based on individual patients’ pre-randomization LDL-C and expected incremental change).

Results

Questionnaires were completed for 1,534 patients. No change in therapy, or double atorvastatin dose, were frequently recommended, even when LDL-C was far from goal (6.5% and 52.2% of patients, respectively). Double atorvastatin dose was commonly recommended in all scenarios (43–52% of patients). More intensive LDL-C-lowering regimens were recommended infrequently e.g. double atorvastatin dose and add ezetimibe only <12% in all scenarios. Overall, cardiovascular risk factors and desire to achieve a more aggressive LDL-C goal were prominent factors in decision-making for treatment. Comparison of observed and estimated LDL-C levels showed that physicians tended to overestimate the effectiveness of their recommendations.

Conclusions

This study provides insight into physicians’ perspectives on clinical management of hypercholesterolemia and highlights a gap in knowledge translation from guidelines to clinical practice. The need for lower LDL-C and cardiovascular risk were key drivers in clinical decision-making, but physicians’ treatment choices were more conservative than guideline recommendations, potentially resulting in poorer LDL-C reduction. When compared with actual outcomes, projected LDL-C control was better if physicians used more comprehensive strategies rather than simply doubling the statin dose.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01154036

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12944-015-0037-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.