Effects of rosuvastatin combined with olmesartan, irbesartan, or telmisartan on indices of glucose metabolism in Greek adults with impaired fasting glucose, hypertension, and mixed hyperlipidemia: a 24-week, randomized, open-label, prospective study

Effects of high-intensity statin combined with telmisartan versus amlodipine on glucose metabolism in hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease patients with impaired fasting glucose: A randomized multicenter trial

BACKGROUND

There is lacking evidence that telmisartan can improve insulin resistance in patients on high-intensity statins. This study compared the effects of telmisartan and amlodipine on glucose metabolism in hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) patients with impaired fasting glucose (IFG) requiring high-intensity rosuvastatin therapy.

METHODS

Ninety-nine patients were randomly assigned to 2 groups [telmisartan-statin group (n=48) and amlodipine-statin group (n=51)] as add-on therapy to high-intensity rosuvastatin therapy (20 mg). The primary endpoint was to assess insulin resistance using the homeostatic model assessment (HOMA-IR) value at week 24. The secondary endpoint was the change in glucose metabolism indices from baseline to week 24.

RESULTS

The HOMA-IR at week 24 (2.4 [interquartile range, 1.8-3.8] versus 2.7 [1.7-3.7]; P = .809) and changes in the HOMA-IR from baseline to week 24 (-7.0 [-29.0 to 21.0] versus -5.5 [-53.3 to 27.3]; P = .539) were not significantly different between 2 groups. However, the fasting glucose level at week 24 was significantly lower in the telmisartan-statin group than in the amlodipine-statin group (107.7 ± 13.4 mg/dL versus 113.3 ± 12.4 mg/dL; P = .039) and significantly decreased in the telmisartan-statin group (-3.2 ± 8.6% versus 3.8 ± 13.2%; P = .003). The proportion of patients with fasting glucose ≥100 mg/dL (71.1% versus 89.6%; P = .047) or new-onset diabetes mellitus (12.5% versus 31.4%, P = .044) at week 24 was also significantly lower in the telmisartan-statin group than in the amlodipine-statin group.

CONCLUSION

In comparison to amlodipine, telmisartan did not decrease the HOMA-IR. However, telmisartan preserved insulin secretion, led to a regression from IFG to euglycemia and prevented new-onset diabetes mellitus in ASCVD patients with IFG requiring high-intensity statins.

Comparative efficacy of fixed-dose statin and antihypertensive agent combinations: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The concurrent administration of statins and antihypertensive agents has been associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes, although the optimal fixed-dose combination remains unclear. This meta-analysis aims to compare the blood pressure and lipid-lowering effects of various statin and antihypertensive drug combinations.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL and Clinicaltrials.gov were systematically searched from inception to 20 March 2021. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of statin-antihypertensive agent combinations on systolic blood pressure or serum lipids were held eligible. A random-effects frequentist model was applied to provide estimates of mean difference of percentage change.

RESULTS

Overall, 18 studies were included, comprising 4450 patients. Compared to statin monotherapy no significant difference in the percentage change of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was achieved by adding any antihypertensive agent. Compared to amlodipine monotherapy, the addition of moderate-intensity statin resulted in a significantly greater percentage reduction of systolic blood pressure (-2.22%, 95% confidence intervals: [-3.82 to -0.62]). Combined high-intensity statin and amlodipine lead to significant increase of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (8.34%, 95% confidence intervals: [0.73 to 15.95]), while effective triglyceride reduction was achieved by adding amlodipine and telmisartan to high-intensity statin (-14.68%, 95% confidence intervals: [-28.48 to -0.89]). No significant difference of adverse effects was observed.

CONCLUSION

The present network meta-analysis suggests that the administration of fixed-dose combinations of statins and antihypertensive agents is safe and effective in reducing blood pressure and serum lipids. The optimal dosing strategy to prevent cardiovascular events remains to be determined.

TAILoR (TelmisArtan and InsuLin Resistance in Human Immunodeficiency Virus [HIV]): An Adaptive-design, Dose-ranging Phase IIb Randomized Trial of Telmisartan for the Reduction of Insulin Resistance in HIV-positive Individuals on Combination Antiretroviral Therapy

BACKGROUND

Combination antiretroviral therapy results in metabolic abnormalities which increase cardiovascular disease risk. We evaluated whether telmisartan reduces insulin resistance in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive individuals on antiretrovirals.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, dose-ranging controlled trial of telmisartan. Participants with HIV infection receiving combination antiretroviral therapy were randomized equally to either no intervention (control) or 20, 40, or 80 mg telmisartan once daily. The adaptive design allowed testing of all dose(s) of telmisartan in stage I, with the promising dose(s) being taken into stage II. The primary outcome measure was reduction in homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) at 24 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 377 patients were recruited. In stage I, 48, 49, 47, and 45 patients were randomized to control and 20, 40, and 80 mg telmisartan, respectively (total n = 189). At the interim analysis, 80 mg telmisartan was taken forward into stage II. At the end of stage II (n = 105, control; 106, 80-mg arm), there were no differences in HOMA-IR (estimated effect, 0.007; SE, 0.106) at 24 weeks between the telmisartan (80 mg) and nonintervention arms. Longitudinal analysis over 48 weeks showed no change in HOMA-IR, lipid or adipokine levels. There were significant (P ≤ .05), but marginal, improvements in revised Quantitative Insulin Sensitivity Check Index (QUICKI) (0.004) and plasma hs-CRP (-0.222 mg/L) and reduction in liver fat content (1.714 mean reduction; P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

No significant effect of telmisartan was demonstrated on the primary outcome (HOMA-IR), but there were marginal improvements with some secondary outcome measures. Further studies in this population are warranted to identify novel strategies for preventing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry (51069819).

Medications that cause weight gain and alternatives in Canada: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

The cause of the obesity epidemic is multifactorial, but may, in part, be related to medication-induced weight gain. While clinicians may strive to do their best to select pharmacotherapy(ies) that has the least negative impact on weight, the literature regarding the weight effects of medication is often limited and devoid of alternative therapies.

RESULTS

Antipsychotics, antidepressants, antihyperglycemics, antihypertensives and corticosteroids all contain medications that were associated with significant weight gain. However, there are several medication alternatives within the majority of these classes associated with weight neutral or even weight loss effects. Further, while not all of the classes of medication examined in this review have weight-favorable alternatives, there exist many other tools to mitigate weight gain associated with medication use, such as changes in dosing, medication delivery or the use of adjunctive therapies.

CONCLUSION

Medication-induced weight gain can be frustrating for both the patient and the clinician. As the use of pharmaceuticals continues to increase, it is pertinent for clinicians to consider the weight effects of medications prior to prescribing or in the course of treatment. In the case where it is not feasible to make changes to medication, adjunctive therapies should be considered.

Comparative Efficacy of Angiotensin II Antagonists in Essential Hypertension: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the long-term clinical benefits of individual members of angiotensin II receptor blockers is limited given the lack of head-to-head studies. We conducted a network meta-analysis to determine the comparative efficacy of different members within this drug class with respect to outcomes of (i) blood pressure reduction (at 24 and 52 weeks) and (ii) prevention of cardiovascular disease (>104 weeks).

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted - Protocol registration: (PROSPERO - CRD42014007067) - to identify relevant literature from the following databases: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline and EMBASE; searched from inception to July 2016. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they reported long-term effectiveness relating to blood pressure, mortality, myocardial infarction or stroke. Eligible studies included those with placebo or specific active-treatment comparators (either another angiotensin II receptor blockers or hydrochlorothiazide). A Bayesian random-effects network model was used to combine direct within-trial comparisons between treatment groups with indirect evidence from other trials.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were identified, representing 28 unique trials. Blood pressure reduction, based on 12 studies (n=807) with fixed dosing regimen, was found to be similar amongst members of the angiotensin receptor blocker drug class at both 24 and 52 weeks. A network meta-analysis of five studies (n=16,716) with a treat-to-target approach found that prevention of all-cause mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction was similar across the angiotensin-receptor blockers therapies initiated.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is insufficient to show differences in any members within the angiotensin II receptor blocker drug class with respect to blood pressuring lowering effects or a reduction in cardiovascular diseases.

Effects of telmisartan on fat distribution: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Several meta-analyses have confirmed the positive metabolic effects of telmisartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker that can also act as a partial peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ agonist, compared to those of other angiotensin II receptor blockers. These effects include decreased fasting glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α levels. However, no systemic analysis of telmisartan's effects on body fat distribution has been performed. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled telmisartan trials to investigate its effects on body weight, fat distribution, and visceral adipose reduction.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A literature search was performed using Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library between January 1966 and November 2013. Randomized controlled trials in English and meeting the following criterion were included: random assignment of hypertensive participants with overweight/obesity, metabolic syndrome, or glucose intolerance to telmisartan or control therapy group.

RESULTS

Of 651 potentially relevant reports, 15 satisfied the inclusion criterion. While visceral fat area was significantly lower in the telmisartan group than in the control group (weighted mean difference = -18.13 cm(2), 95% C.I. = -27.16 to -9.11, Pχ(2) = 0.19, I(2) = 41%), subcutaneous fat area was similar (weighted mean difference =2.94 cm(2), 95% C.I. = -13.01 to 18.89, Pχ(2) = 0.30, I(2) = 17%). Total cholesterol levels were significantly different between the groups (standardized mean difference = -0.24, 95% C.I. = -0.45 to -0.03, Pχ(2) = 0.0002, I(2) = 67%).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include: (1) limited number of studies, especially those evaluating fat distribution; (2) different imaging modalities to assess visceral fat area (V.F.A.) and subcutaneous fat area (S.F.A.); (3) observed heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that telmisartan affected fat distribution, inducing visceral fat reduction, and thus could be useful in hypertensive patients with obesity/overweight, metabolic syndrome, or glucose intolerance.

Co-administration of metformin and N-acetylcysteine with dietary control improves the biochemical and histological manifestations in rats with non-alcoholic fatty liver

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a burgeoning health problem that affects 1/3 of the adult population and an increasing number of children in developed countries. Oxidative stress and insulin resistance are the mechanisms that seem to be mostly involved in its pathogenesis. This study was conceived in a NAFLD rat model to evaluate the efficacy of both metformin (MTF) and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) with dietary control on biochemical and histologic liver manifestations. Rats were classified into nine groups; normal (I), NAFLD-induced by feeding high-fat diet (HFD; II) for 12 weeks, NAFLD switched to regular diet (RD; III), NAFLD-HFD or -RD treated with MTF in a dose of 150 mg/kg (IV, V), NAC in a dose of 500 mg/kg (VI, VII) or MTF+NAC (VIII, IX) respectively for 8 weeks. After 20 weeks, the rats in group II showed notable steatosis, lobular inflammation, fibrosis accompanied with elevated (P < 0.05) serum alanine transaminase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), gamma glutamyl transferase (γ-GT), cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL, VLDL, leptin, tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α), transforming growth factor (TGF-β1) and hepatic malondialdehyde (MDA) compared with group I. Meanwhile, hepatic superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione GSH with serum HDL, adiponectin were significantly decreased (P < 0.05). These changes were to a less extent in group III. MTF or NAC individually resulted in improvement of most of these biochemical and histological parameters. These improvements were more pronounced in the combined groups VIII and IX versus each drug alone. NAC supplementation concomitant with MTF could be beneficial for the treatment of NAFLD and prevention of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH).

Telmisartan and Insulin Resistance in HIV (TAILoR): protocol for a dose-ranging phase II randomised open-labelled trial of telmisartan as a strategy for the reduction of insulin resistance in HIV-positive individuals on combination antiretroviral therapy

INTRODUCTION

Telmisartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker, has beneficial effects on insulin resistance and cardiovascular health in non-HIV populations. This trial will evaluate whether telmisartan can reduce insulin resistance in HIV-positive individuals on combination antiretroviral therapy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a phase II, multicentre, randomised, open-labelled, dose-ranging trial of telmisartan in 336 HIV-positive individuals over a period of 48 weeks. The trial will use an adaptive design to inform the optimal dose of telmisartan. Patients will be randomised initially 1:1:1:1 to receive one of the three doses of telmisartan (20, 40 and 80 mg) or no intervention (control). An interim analysis will be performed when half of the planned maximum of 336 patients have been followed up for at least 24 weeks. The second stage of the study will depend on the results of interim analysis. The primary outcome measure is a reduction in insulin resistance (as measured by Homeostatic Model Assessment-Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR)) in telmisartan treated arm(s) after 24 weeks of treatment in comparison with the non-intervention arm. The secondary outcome measures include changes in lipid profile; body fat redistribution (as measured by MRI); plasma and urinary levels of various biomarkers of cardiometabolic and renal health at 12, 24 and 48 weeks. Serious adverse events will be compared between different telmisartan treated dose arm(s) and the control arm.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study, this protocol and related documents have been approved by the National Research Ethics Service Committee North West-Liverpool Central (Ref: 12/NW/0214). On successful completion, study data will be shared with academic collaborators. The findings from TAILoR will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, at scientific conferences, the media and through patient and public involvement.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

04196/0024/001-0001;

EUDRACT

2012-000935-18;

ISRCTN

51069819.

The Effect of Rosuvastatin on Low-Density Lipoprotein Subfractions in Patients With Impaired Fasting Glucose

Background:

Prediabetes substantially increases cardiovascular risk. We examined the effect of rosuvastatin on the quantity and quality of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with dyslipidemia having impaired fasting glucose (IFG) compared to normoglycemic patients with dyslipidemia.

Methods:

This was a prospective observational study including patients with dyslipidemia and IFG (IFG group, n = 49) matched with normoglycemic patients with dyslipidemia (control group, n = 64). Study participants, following dietary intervention, were prescribed rosuvastatin 10 or 20 mg/d to achieve LDL-C goals. Baseline as well as 24 weeks posttreatment changes in the serum lipid profile were evaluated. Moreover, analysis of the LDL subfraction profile was conducted using a polyacrylamide tube gel electrophoresis method.

Results:

Similar effects were observed in lipid profile in both treatment groups. Patients with IFG experienced a greater decrease in the cholesterol concentration of small dense LDL particles (−65.7%, P < .001 vs baseline) compared to controls (−38.5%, P < .001 vs baseline; P = .018 vs patients with IFG). There was no significant difference in the changes of cholesterol concentration of large and buoyant LDL particles in the IFG group when compared to the control group. A greater increase in the mean LDL particle size (+1.5%, P < .001 vs baseline) was noted in the IFG group compared to the control group at 24 weeks (+0.4%, P = .028 vs baseline; P = .008 vs IFG group).

Conclusion:

Targeting dyslipidemia with rosuvastatin was associated with more favorable changes in the LDL subfraction profile in patients with IFG compared to normoglycemic ones.

Pharmacokinetic interaction between rosuvastatin and olmesartan: a randomized, open-label, 3-period, multiple-dose crossover study in healthy Korean male subjects

PURPOSE

Rosuvastatin has been widely used in combination with olmesartan for the treatment of dyslipidemia accompanied by hypertension. With no information currently available on the interaction between the 2 drugs, a pharmacokinetic study was conducted to investigate the influence of rosuvastatin on olmesartan and vice versa when the 2 drugs were coadministered. The purpose of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic profile of coadministration of the rosuvastatin 20-mg tablet and the olmesartan 40-mg tablet and the associated drug-drug interaction in healthy Korean male volunteers.

METHODS

This was a randomized, open-label, 3-period, multiple-dose crossover study. Eligible subjects were aged 20 to 50 years and within 20% of their ideal body weight. After being randomly assigned to 6 groups of equal number, subjects received each of the following 3 formulations once a day for 7 consecutive days with an 8-day washout period between the formulations: rosuvastatin 20-mg tablet, olmesartan 40-mg tablet, and coadministration of the rosuvastatin 20-mg tablet and the olmesartan 40-mg tablet. Blood samples were collected up to 72 hours after dosing, and pharmacokinetic parameters were determined for rosuvastatin, its active metabolite (N-desmethyl rosuvastatin), and olmesartan. Adverse events were evaluated based on subject interviews and physical examinations.

FINDINGS

Among the 36 enrolled subjects, 34 completed the study (mean [range] age, 28.6 [23-49] y; mean [range] weight, 66.4 [52.2-78.7] kg). The 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios for the primary pharmacokinetic parameters for the coadministration of the 2 drugs to the mono-administration of each drug were 85.14% to 96.08% for AUCτ and 81.41% to 97.48% for Css,max for rosuvastatin, and 77.55% to 89.48% for AUCτ and 75.62% to 90.12% for Css,max for N-desmethyl rosuvastatin; those values were 95.61% to 102.57% for AUCτ and 91.73% to 102.98% for Css,max for olmesartan. Dizziness was the most frequently noted adverse drug reaction, occurring in 1 subject receiving mono-administration of rosuvastatin, 1 subject receiving mono-administration of olmesartan, and 4 subjects receiving coadministration of rosuvastatin and olmesartan. All the adverse events were expected, and there was no significant difference in the incidence between the 2 formulations.

IMPLICATIONS

This study suggests that rosuvastatin and olmesartan did not significantly influence each other's pharmacokinetics when coadministered. Although the pharmacokinetics of N-desmethyl rosuvastatin were influenced by olmesartan, such interactions were considered clinically insignificant. All 3 formulations were well tolerated, and no serious adverse events or drug reactions were noted.

Pharmacokinetic interaction between rosuvastatin and telmisartan in healthy Korean male volunteers: a randomized, open-label, two-period, crossover, multiple-dose study

PURPOSE

Rosuvastatin, a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor, and telmisartan, an angiotensin receptor blocker, are commonly prescribed in combination for the treatment of dyslipidemia accompanied by hypertension. However, the nature of the pharmacokinetic interaction between the 2 drugs is not clearly understood. The goal of the present study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between rosuvastatin and telmisartan in a healthy Korean population.

METHODS

This was a randomized, 2-part, open-label, 2-period, crossover, multiple-dose study, with each part composed of different subjects between the ages of 20 and 55 years. In part 1, each subject received rosuvastatin 20 mg with and without telmisartan 80 mg once daily for 6 consecutive days. In part 2, each subject received telmisartan 80 mg with and without rosuvastatin 20 mg once daily for 6 consecutive days. In both parts, there was a 16-day washout period between mono- and coadministration. Blood samples were collected up to 72 hours after the last dose. Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated through interviews and physical examinations.

FINDINGS

In part 1, the 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios for the primary pharmacokinetic parameters for coadministration of the 2 drugs to monoadministration of each drug were 1.0736-1.2932 for AUCτ and 1.7442-2.3229 for Cmax,ss for rosuvastatin and 0.9942-1.1594 for AUCτ and 1.3593-1.7169 for Cmax,ss for N-desmethyl rosuvastatin, whereas in part 2, the CIs were 1.0834-1.2672 for AUCτ and 1.1534-1.5803 for Cmax,ss for telmisartan. The most frequently noted AE was cough in part 1, which occurred in 2 subjects receiving the combination therapy, and oropharyngeal pain in part 2, which occurred in 3 subjects receiving the combination therapy. All reported AEs were mild or moderate, and there was no significant difference in incidence between the treatments.

IMPLICATIONS

These findings demonstrated that rosuvastatin and telmisartan mutually affected each other's pharmacokinetics, suggesting a possibility of drug-drug interaction. However, based on dose-response characteristics of the 2 drugs and previous results from other interaction studies, the degree of drug interaction observed in this study was not regarded as clinically significant. All treatments were well tolerated, with no serious AEs observed. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01992601.

A meta-analysis of randomized trials of telmisartan versus active controls for insulin resistance in hypertensive patients

To determine whether telmisartan improves insulin resistance compared with other antihypertensive drugs, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of telmisartan. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through December 2013. Eligible studies were prospective RCTs of telmisartan versus other antihypertensive drugs, enrolling individuals with hypertension and reporting insulin levels and/or homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) as outcomes. Of 67 potentially relevant articles screened initially, 33 reports of RCTs enrolling a total of 2033 patients with hypertension were identified and included. Pooled analyses of only the eight double-blind-design trials demonstrated statistically significant reductions in percent changes of insulin levels (mean difference, -5.19%; 95% confidence interval, -8.94% to -1.43%; P = .007) and HOMA-IR (-15.34%; -26.39% to -4.28%; P = .007) with telmisartan relative to other antihypertensive drugs. When data from all the 33 trials were pooled, telmisartan was associated with statistically significant reductions in percent changes of insulin levels (-10.92%; -15.60% to -6.23%; P < .00001) and HOMA-IR (-15.89%; -22.01% to -9.78%; P < .00001) relative to other antihypertensive drugs. In conclusion, telmisartan appears to significantly improve insulin resistance compared with other antihypertensive drugs in patients with hypertension.

Distinct properties of telmisartan on agonistic activities for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ among clinically used angiotensin II receptor blockers: drug-target interaction analyses

A proportion of angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) improves glucose dyshomeostasis and insulin resistance in a clinical setting. Of these ARBs, telmisartan has the unique property of being a partial agonist for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPARγ). However, the detailed mechanism of how telmisartan acts on PPARγ and exerts its insulin-sensitizing effect is poorly understood. In this context, we investigated the agonistic activity of a variety of clinically available ARBs on PPARγ using isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) and surface plasmon resonance (SPR) system. Based on physicochemical data, we then reevaluated the metabolically beneficial effects of telmisartan in cultured murine adipocytes. ITC and SPR assays demonstrated that telmisartan exhibited the highest affinity of the ARBs tested. Distribution coefficient and parallel artificial membrane permeability assays were used to assess lipophilicity and cell permeability, for which telmisartan exhibited the highest levels of both. We next examined the effect of each ARB on insulin-mediated glucose metabolism in 3T3-L1 preadipocytes. To investigate the impact on adipogenesis, 3T3-L1 preadipocytes were differentiated with each ARB in addition to standard inducers of differentiation for adipogenesis. Telmisartan dose-dependently facilitated adipogenesis and markedly augmented the mRNA expression of adipocyte fatty acid-binding protein (aP2), accompanied by an increase in the uptake of 2-deoxyglucose and protein expression of glucose transporter 4 (GLUT4). In contrast, other ARBs showed only marginal effects in these experiments. In accordance with its highest affinity of binding for PPARγ as well as the highest cell permeability, telmisartan superbly activates PPARγ among the ARBs tested, thereby providing a fresh avenue for treating hypertensive patients with metabolic derangement.

Combining Rosuvastatin With Angiotensin-Receptor Blockers of Different PPARγ-Activating Capacity

The effects of combining angiotensin-receptor blockers of different peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ-activating capacity with rosuvastatin on high-density lipoprotein (HDL) subfractions and associated enzymes in patients with mixed dyslipidemia, hypertension, and prediabetes were assessed. Patients (n = 151) were randomly allocated to rosuvastatin (10 mg/d) plus telmisartan 80 mg/d (RT group, n = 52) or irbesartan 300 mg/d (RI group, n = 48) or olmesartan 20 mg/d (RO group, n = 51). Total and intermediate HDL cholesterol (HDL-C) levels did not change in any group. Large HDL-C increased, while small HDL-C decreased significantly in all the groups ( P = not significant between the groups). The mass of HDL lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 (HDL-Lp-PLA2) and the activities of paraoxonase 1 remained unchanged in all the groups. However, HDL-Lp-PLA2 activity increased only in the RT group (+21.4%; P < .01 vs baseline) and did not change in the RI (−4.3%; P = .005 vs RT group) and RO (+3.2%; P = .01 vs RT) groups. In conclusion, only the combination of rosuvastatin with telmisartan increased the possibly antiatherosclerotic HDL-Lp-PLA2 activity.

Pleiotropic effects of rosuvastatin on the glucose metabolism and the subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue behavior in C57Bl/6 mice

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether rosuvastatin (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor) modulates the carbohydrate and lipid metabolism, the development of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and the increase in body mass in a model of diet-induced obesity. Male C57Bl/6 mice (3-months-old) were fed a high-fat diet (HF, 60% lipids) or the standard chow (SC, 10% lipids) for 15 weeks. The animals were then treated with 10 mg/kg/day (HF-R10 group), 20 mg/kg/day (HF-R20), or 40 mg/kg/day (HF-R40) of rosuvastatin for five weeks. The HF diet led to glucose intolerance, insulin resistance, weight gain, increased visceral adiposity with adipocyte hypertrophy, and hepatic steatosis (micro and macrovesicular). The rosuvastatin treatment decreased the adiposity and the adipocyte size in the HF-R10 and HF-R20 groups. In addition, rosuvastatin changed the pattern of fat distribution in the HF-R40 group because more fat was stored subcutaneously than in visceral depots. This redistribution improved the fasting glucose and the glucose intolerance. Rosuvastatin also improved the liver morphology and ultrastructure in a dose-dependent manner. In conclusion, rosuvastatin exerts pleiotropic effects through a dose-dependent improvement of glucose intolerance, insulin sensitivity and NAFLD and changes the fat distribution from visceral to subcutaneous fat depots in a mouse model of diet-induced obesity.

The effect of combining rosuvastatin with sartans of different peroxisome proliferator receptor-γ activating capacity on plasma 8-isoprostane prostaglandin F2a levels

INTRODUCTION

Oxidative stress is associated with the development and progression of cardiovascular disease. Plasma 8-isoprostane prostaglandin F2a (8-iso-PGF2a) levels are a reliable marker of oxidative stress.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients (n = 151) with hypertension, dyslipidemia and impaired fasting glucose were randomly allocated to rosuvastatin (10 mg/day) plus telmisartan 80 mg/day (RT group, n = 52) or irbesartan 300 mg/day (RI group, n = 48) or olmesartan 20 mg/day (RO group, n = 51). After 6 months of treatment, changes in plasma 8-iso-PGF2a levels were blindly evaluated.

RESULTS

A decrease of 8-iso-PGF2a levels vs baseline was observed only in the RT group (-8.6%; p = 0.02). A trend for decrease vs. baseline was observed in the RI (-5.7%; p = 0.40) and RO (-3.7%; p = 0.60) groups. Changes of 8-iso-PGF2a levels between groups were not significantly different (p = 0.70).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of rosuvastatin with sartans of different peroxisome proliferator receptor-γ activating capacity was associated with a decrease in levels of plasma 8-iso-PGF2a. This decrease reached significance only in the telmisartan group.

Effects of manidipine plus rosuvastatin versus olmesartan plus rosuvastatin on markers of insulin resistance in patients with impaired fasting glucose, hypertension, and mixed dyslipidemia

AIM

To compare the effect of manidipine 20 mg plus rosuvastatin 10 mg versus olmesartan 20 mg plus rosuvastatin 10 mg on markers of insulin resistance in patients with mixed dyslipidemia, hypertension, and impaired fasting glucose (IFG).

METHODS

This study had a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE) design. A total of 40 patients with IFG, mixed dyslipidemia, and stage 1 hypertension were included. Following dietary intervention, patients were randomly allocated to rosuvastatin (10 mg/d) plus olmesartan (20 mg/d) or manidipine (20 mg/d). The primary end point was the between-group difference in changes in the Homeostasis Model Assessment Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) index following 3 months of treatment. Secondary end points included changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting insulin levels, and glucosylated hemoglobin.

RESULTS

At the end of the 3-month treatment period, a significant increase in HOMA-IR index by 14% (from 2.4 [0.5-7.9] to 2.7 [0.5-5.2], P = .02 versus baseline) was seen in the olmesartan plus rosuvastatin group. On the contrary, no significant change in HOMA-IR index was observed in the manidipine plus rosuvastatin group (1.7 [0.5-5.2] to 1.7 [0.8-6.0], P = NS versus baseline, P = .04 versus olmesartan plus rosuvastatin group). An increase in fasting insulin levels was observed in the olmesartan plus rosuvastatin group (+8%, from 10.1 [2.0-29.6] to 10.9 [2.0-19.1] μU/mL, P < .05 versus baseline), while no significant change was seen in the manidipine plus rosuvastatin group (+3%, from 7.3 [2.0-17.6] to 7.5 [1.9-15.6] μU/mL, P = NS versus baseline, P = .02 versus olmesartan plus rosuvastatin group). Fasting plasma glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin did not change significantly in any group.

CONCLUSION

Manidipine seems to ameliorate the possible statin-associated increase in insulin resistance as compared with olmesartan in patients with IFG, hypertension, and mixed dyslipidemia.

Link between the renin-angiotensin system and insulin resistance: implications for cardiovascular disease

The incidence of metabolic syndrome is rapidly increasing in the United States and worldwide. The metabolic syndrome is a complex metabolic and vascular disorder that is associated with inappropriate activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) in the cardiovascular (CV) system and increased CV morbidity and mortality. Insulin activation of the phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) pathway promotes nitric oxide (NO) production in the endothelium and glucose uptake in insulin-sensitive tissues. Angiotensin (Ang) II inhibits insulin-mediated PI3K pathway activation, thereby impairing endothelial NO production and Glut-4 translocation in insulin-sensitive tissues, which results in vascular and systemic insulin resistance, respectively. On the other hand, Ang II enhances insulin-mediated activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, which leads to vasoconstriction and pathologic vascular cellular growth. Therefore, the interaction of Ang II with insulin signaling is fully operative not only in insulin-sensitive tissues but also in CV tissues, thereby linking insulin resistance and CV disease. This notion is further supported by an increasing number of experimental and clinical studies indicating that pharmacological blockade of RAAS improves insulin sensitivity and endothelial function, as well as reduces the incidence of new-onset diabetes in high-risk patients with CV disease. This article reviews experimental and clinical data elucidating the physiological and pathophysiological role of the interaction between insulin and RAAS in the development of insulin resistance as well as CV disease.

Beneficial effects of rosuvastatin on insulin resistance, adiposity, inflammatory markers and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in mice fed on a high-fat diet

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of ST (rosuvastatin) and GZ (rosiglitazone) on IR (insulin resistance) and on liver as well as adipose tissue in mice fed on an HF (high-fat) diet. Our data show that treatment with ST resulted in a marked improvement in insulin sensitivity characterized by enhanced glucose clearance during the insulin tolerance test and a 70% decrease in the HOMA-IR (homoeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance) index level (P=0.0008). The ST-treated mice exhibited lower gains in BM (body mass; -8%; P<0.01) and visceral fat pad thickness (-60%; P<0.01) compared with the untreated HF group. In comparison with HF-diet-fed mice, HF+ST-treated mice showed a significant reduction in hepatomegaly and liver steatosis (-6%, P<0.05; and -21%, P<0.01 respectively). In HF+ST-treated mice, the hepatic TAG (triacylglycerol) levels were reduced by 58% compared with the HF group (P<0.01). In addition, the expression of SREBP-1c (sterol-regulatory-element-binding protein-1c) was decreased by 50% in the livers of HF+ST-treated mice (P<0.01) relative to the HF-diet-fed mice. The levels of resistin were lower in the HF+ST-treated group compared with the HF group (44% less, P< 0.01). In conclusion, we demonstrated that ST treatment improved insulin sensitivity and decreased liver steatosis in mice fed on an HF diet. Furthermore, ST reduced BM gains, improved the circulating levels of plasma cholesterol and TAG, and reduced hepatic TAG, which was concomitant with lower resistin levels.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers for treatment of ischemic heart disease: Future research needs prioritization

BACKGROUND

A recent review evaluated the comparative effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) in patients with or at high risk for stable ischemic heart disease (IHD). The prioritization of future research needs has customarily been an informal process that is not responsive to the needs of all relevant stakeholders.

METHODS

As part of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Effective Healthcare Program, the Duke Evidence-Based Practice Center engaged a diverse stakeholder group in 3 exercises designed to prioritize future research needs pertaining to the comparative effectiveness of ACE-I/ARB in patients with stable IHD.

RESULTS

Our stakeholders prioritized the following areas of research pertaining to the comparative effectiveness of ACE-I/ARB in stable IHD: (1) strategies to enhance greater evidence-based use, (2) impact of adherence on effectiveness or harms, (3) impact of comorbidities on effectiveness or harms, (4) medication impact on patient quality of life, (5) impact of demographic differences on effectiveness or harms, and (6) medication impact on incidence of new diagnoses. This project also yielded suggestions regarding potential study designs to address these future research needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our stakeholders prioritized research designed to facilitate (1) tailored ACE-I/ARB treatment based on individual patient characteristics and (2) implementation of ACE-I/ARB use among patients most likely to benefit. With respect to suggested study designs, it was felt that analysis of existing data would sufficiently address many of the top-tier future research needs (FRNs).

Manidipine: A different dihydropyridine

Blood pressure (BP) plays an important role in the development and progression of cardiovascular disease. Moreover, hypertensive patients often have additional cardiovascular risk factors. Despite the abundance of antihypertensive drug categories, satisfactory BP regulation is often difficult to achieve. A major cause of this difficulty to properly manage BP is the less than optimal adherence of subjects to treatment. This is often due to the various adverse effects of the antihypertensive drugs. Calcium channel blockers (CCB) have an established efficacy for reducing BP. However, their side effect of peripheral edema is often a cause for the discontinuation of treatment. Manidipine holds some unique properties differentiating it from the rest of the CCB class. It has a better safety profile with a lower incidence of peripheral edema. Moreover, there are indications that manidipine holds additional beneficial attributes, such as improvement of renal function and decrease of insulin resistance.

Comparison of the effects of simvastatin vs. rosuvastatin vs. simvastatin/ezetimibe on parameters of insulin resistance

BACKGROUND

Statin treatment may be associated with adverse effects on glucose metabolism. Whether this is a class effect is not known. In contrast, ezetimibe monotherapy may beneficially affect insulin sensitivity.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of three different regimens of equivalent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering capacity on glucose metabolism.

METHODS

A total of 153 patients (56 men), who had not achieved the LDL-C goal recommended by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III) despite a 3-month dietary and lifestyle intervention, were randomly allocated to receive open-label simvastatin 40 mg or rosuvastatin 10 mg or simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg for 12 weeks. The primary end point was changes in homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). Secondary endpoints consisted of changes in fasting insulin levels, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c) ), the HOMA of β-cell function (HOMA-B) (a marker of basal insulin secretion by pancreatic β-cells), LDL-C and high sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP).

RESULTS

  At week 12, all three treatment regimens were associated with significant increases in HOMA-IR and fasting insulin levels (p < 0.05 compared with baseline). No significant difference was observed between groups. No change in FPG, HbA(1c) and HOMA-B levels compared with baseline were noted in any of the three treatment groups. Changes in serum lipids and hsCRP were similar across groups.

CONCLUSION

To the extent that simvastatin 40 mg, rosuvastatin 10 mg and simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg are associated with adverse effects on insulin resistance, they appear to be of the same magnitude.

Current role of statins in the treatment of essential hypertension

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Hypertension and hyperlipidemia often co-exist and seem to be interrelated through common pathophysiological pathways. Drugs employing beneficial effects in both conditions could be advantageous in a concerted effective management of patients at high cardiovascular risk. Statins are known to enhance cardiovascular protection beyond their lipid-lowering capacity.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

MEDLINE was searched, up to January 2010, for studies assessing the effect of statin treatment on blood pressure control in various populations or animal models of hypertension. The potential mechanisms implicated in the putative antihypertensive action of statins are also reviewed.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

To learn about the role of statins as potential antihypertensive drugs in various populations. Clinical advice for the use of statins either as monotherapy or in combination with antihypertensive drugs in high-risk populations is also provided.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Statins may exert a mild, but clinically relevant, antihypertensive effect which is probably mediated by mechanisms that are independent of their lipid-lowering effects. Patients with high BP levels at baseline as well as those treated with ACE inhibitors and calcium channel blockers are expected to benefit more in this regard.