Combination Therapy of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe in Patients with High Cardiovascular Risk

Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Low/Moderate-Intensity Statin plus Ezetimibe Combination Therapy vs. High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: An Updated Meta-Analysis

AIM

Statin therapy is considered the gold standard for treating hypercholesterolemia. This updated meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of a low/moderate-intensity statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

METHODS

A systematic search of two databases (PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL) was conducted from inception to January 2023 and a total of 21 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified and included in the analysis. Data were pooled using Hedges's g and a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to derive standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (Cis). The primary outcome studied was the effect of these treatments on lipid parameters and safety events.

RESULTS

The results revealed that combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (SMD= - 0.41; CI - 0.63 to - 0.19; P = 0.0002). There was no significant change in the levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), Apo A1, or Apo B. The safety of these treatments was assessed by the following markers alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and creatine phosphokinase (CK), and a significant difference was only observed in CK (SMD: - 0.81; CI - 1.52 to - 0.10; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of low/moderate-intensity statin combination therapy significantly reduced LDL-C levels compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy, making it preferable for patients with related risks. However, further trials are encouraged to evaluate potential adverse effects associated with combined therapy.

Rosuvastatin-Based Lipid-Lowering Therapy for the Control of LDL Cholesterol in Patients at High Vascular Risk

Vascular diseases are the leading cause of death in Spain. Hypercholesterolemia is not only a cardiovascular risk factor, but also underlies the etiopathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Therefore, reducing LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) to the goals recommended by clinical practice guidelines, is essential to decrease the risk of vascular complications. Despite this, current LDL-C control is scarce, even in subjects with high and very high risk. This is mainly due to an insufficient intensification of lipid-lowering treatment. In this context, it is essential to prescribe the appropriate therapy, adjusted to patient's needs based on their LDL-C and their vascular risk. Rosuvastatin, alone or in combination with ezetimibe, provides intensive LDL-C reductions (up to 50-55% and 60-75%, respectively), with a low risk of side effects and in an efficient manner, in patients both without and with established atherosclerotic vascular disease.

Efficacy and safety of combination therapy with telmisartan, rosuvastatin, and ezetimibe in patients with dyslipidemia and hypertension: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter, therapeutic confirmatory, phase III clinical trial

This study aimed to compare and evaluate the efficacy of the blood pressure (BP) control and cholesterol-lowering effects and safety of combination therapy with telmisartan, rosuvastatin, and ezetimibe versus rosuvastatin and ezetimibe double therapy or telmisartan single therapy in dyslipidemia patients with hypertension. After a wash-out/therapeutic lifestyle change period of ≥4 weeks, a total of 100 eligible patients were randomized and received one of three treatments for 8 weeks: (1) telmisartan 80 mg/rosuvastatin 20 mg/ezetimibe 10 mg (TRE), (2) rosuvastatin 20 mg/ezetimibe 10 mg (RE), or (3) telmisartan 80 mg (T). The primary endpoint was the efficacy evaluation of TRE by comparing changes in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) and mean percentage change in low-density lipoprotein-C (LDL-C) from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment. The least square (LS) mean (SE) changes in msSBP at 8 weeks compared with baseline were -23.02 (3.04) versus -7.18 (3.09) mmHg in the TRE and RE groups, respectively (p < .0001), and -25.80 (2.74) versus -14.92 (2.65) mmHg in the TRE and T groups, respectively (p = .0005). The percentage changes in the mean (SD) LDL-C at 8 weeks compared with baseline were -54.97% (3.49%) versus -0.17% (3.23%) in the TRE and T groups, respectively (p < .0001). No serious adverse events occurred, and no statistically significant differences in the incidence of overall AEs and adverse drug reactions occurred among the three groups. TRE therapy significantly decreased msSBP and LDL-C compared to RE or T therapy with comparable safety and tolerability profiles.

Moderate-Intensity Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe Combination versus Quadruple-Dose Rosuvastatin Monotherapy: A Meta-Analysis and Systemic Review

PURPOSE

There are few studies in the literature on the dosage of statin that equivalently reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) compared to an ezetimibe combination and whether such regimens have differences in safety. We compared the lipid-modifying efficacy and safety of 5 mg rosuvastatin/10 mg ezetimibe to those of 20 mg rosuvastatin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Sciences, and SCOPUS databases up to December 2021. Human studies investigating the two aforementioned regimens with a randomized controlled design were selected. Outcome variables included the percentage reduction in LDL-C and other lipid parameters and rates of composite adverse events (AEs), including muscle-related symptoms. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed after heterogeneity testing between studies.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. The percentage LDL-C reduction did not differ between the combination and monotherapy groups [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.08; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.09 to 0.26; p=0.35]. The risk of composite AEs (odds ratio 0.50; 95% CI 0.15 to 1.72; p=0.27) of the combination was not different compared to the monotherapy group. The percentage of total cholesterol reduction was greater in the combination group (SMD 0.22; p=0.02), whereas that of triglyceride reduction and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol elevation did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that 5 mg rosuvastatin/10 mg ezetimibe had largely comparable lipid-modifying efficacy and tolerability as 20 mg rosuvastatin.

New opportunities in the management and treatment of refractory hypercholesterolemia using in vivo CRISPR-mediated genome/base editing

AIMS

Refractory hypercholesterolemia (RH), caused primarily by the loss-of-function mutation of LDL receptor (LDLR) gene seen in HoFH and HeFH patients, remains a major risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Statin and ezetimibe combination therapy lower circulating LDL by 30% in HoFH patients. PCSK9 mAB, being an LDLR-dependent therapy, is not effective in HoFH, but lowers LDL by 25% in HeFH patients. A maximum reduction of 50% was noted in HoFH patients treated with ANGPTL3 mAB, which was not enough to achieve therapeutic goal of LDL. Therefore, new approaches are warranted to offer hopes to individuals intolerant to higher dose statins and not able to achieve recommended LDL level.

DATA SYNTHESIS

New approaches to lower LDL include gene therapy and gene editing. AAV-based gene therapy has shown encouraging results in animal models. Using CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome/base editing, gain of function and loss of function have been successfully done in animal models. Recent progress in the refinement of genome/base editing has overcome the issues of off-target mutagenesis with ∼1% mutagenesis in case of PCSK9 and almost no off-target mutagenesis in inactivating ANGPTL3 in animal models showing 50% reduction in cholesterol. Current approaches using CRISPR-Cas9 genome/base editing targeting LDLR-dependent and LDLR-independent pathways are underway.

CONCLUSIONS

The new information on gain of LDLR function and inactivation of ANGPTL3 together with developments in genome/base editing technology to overcome off-target insertion and deletion mutagenesis offer hope to refractory hypercholesterolemic individuals who are at a higher risk of developing ASCVD.

Efficacy and Safety of Single-Pill Combination of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe in Chinese Patients with Primary Hypercholesterolemia Inadequately Controlled by Statin Treatment (ROZEL): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double Dummy, Active-Controlled Phase 3 Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

Many patients with primary hypercholesterolemia do not achieve their plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals with statin alone under a recommended dose of statin (e.g., 10 mg rosuvastatin) in China. The objective of this phase III study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new single-pill combination (SPC) of rosuvastatin 10 mg/ezetimibe 10 mg (R10/E10) in this population.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled study in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia inadequately controlled with statin alone. The participants were randomized 1:1 to receive SPC R10/E10 or R10. The primary objective was to demonstrate the superiority of SPC R10/E10 vs. R10 in reducing the LDL-C levels after 8 weeks.

RESULTS

This trial randomized 305 participants to SPC R10/E10 (n = 153) and R10 (n = 152). The superiority of SPC R10/E10 over R10 was demonstrated with the least square (LS) mean difference of percent change in LDL-C from baseline to week 8: - 13.85% (95% confidence interval [CI] - 20.15% to - 7.56%, P < 0.0001). The proportion of participants who achieved the LDL-C target (< 2.6 mmol/l) at week 8 was larger with SPC R10/E10 (n = 80, 54.1%) than with R10 (n = 42, 29.2%) (Odds ratio = 2.80, 95% CI 1.70 to 4.61, P < 0.0001). No unexpected safety findings were reported.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that SPC R10/E10 improve LDL-C reduction and goal achievement in Chinese patients with primary hypercholesterolemia not adequately controlled on statin therapy, without new safety findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04669041).

Lipid-Lowering Efficacy of Combination Therapy With Moderate-Intensity Statin and Ezetimibe Versus High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy: A Randomized, Open-Label, Non-Inferiority Trial From Korea

Objective

This phase IV, multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label, and parallel clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and moderate intensity rosuvastatin combination therapy to that of high intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

Methods

This study enrolled patients with ASCVD and after a four-week screening period, patients were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (RE 10/10 group) or high-intensity rosuvastatin (R20 group) only in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the difference in the percent change in the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline to 12 weeks between two groups after treatment.

Results

The study found that after 12 and 24 weeks of treatment, the RE10/10 group had a greater reduction in LDL-C level compared to the R20 group (-22.9±2.6% vs. -15.6 ± 2.5% [p=0.041] and -24.2±2.5% vs. -12.9±2.4% [p=0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Moreover, a greater number of patients achieved the target LDL-C level of ≤70 mg/dL after the treatment period in the combination group (74.6% vs. 59.9% [p=0.012] and 76.2% vs. 50.8% [p<0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between two groups.

Conclusion

Moderate-intensity rosuvastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy had better efficacy in lowering LDL-C levels without increasing adverse effects in patients with ASCVD than high-intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03494270.

A Review of Progress on Targeting LDL Receptor-Dependent and -Independent Pathways for the Treatment of Hypercholesterolemia, a Major Risk Factor of ASCVD

Since the discovery of the LDL receptor in 1973 by Brown and Goldstein as a causative protein in hypercholesterolemia, tremendous amounts of effort have gone into finding ways to manage high LDL cholesterol in familial hypercholesterolemic (HoFH and HeFH) individuals with loss-of-function mutations in the LDL receptor (LDLR) gene. Statins proved to be the first blockbuster drug, helping both HoFH and HeFH individuals by inhibiting the cholesterol synthesis pathway rate-limiting enzyme HMG-CoA reductase and inducing the LDL receptor. However, statins could not achieve the therapeutic goal of LDL. Other therapies targeting LDLR include PCSK9, which lowers LDLR by promoting LDLR degradation. Inducible degrader of LDLR (IDOL) also controls the LDLR protein, but an IDOL-based therapy is yet to be developed. Among the LDLR-independent pathways, such as angiopoietin-like 3 (ANGPTL3), apolipoprotein (apo) B, apoC-III and CETP, only ANGPTL3 offers the advantage of treating both HoFH and HeFH patients and showing relatively better preclinical and clinical efficacy in animal models and hypercholesterolemic individuals, respectively. While loss-of-LDLR-function mutations have been known for decades, gain-of-LDLR-function mutations have recently been identified in some individuals. The new information on gain of LDLR function, together with CRISPR-Cas9 genome/base editing technology to target LDLR and ANGPTL3, offers promise to HoFH and HeFH individuals who are at a higher risk of developing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

A Bioequivalence Study of Ezetimibe/Rosuvastatin Fixed Dose Combination (10 mg/10 mg) Versus the Individual Formulations Taken Concomitantly

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the bioequivalence of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin fixed dose combination compared to the concomitant administration of individual formulations (ezetimibe and rosuvastatin) in Chinese healthy subjects under fasting conditions.

METHODS

This was a phase I, randomized, open-label, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence, crossover study conducted in healthy Chinese participants under fasting conditions. Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ from test and individual reference formulations were evaluated to assess bioequivalence. The safety assessments included adverse events (AEs)/treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), potential clinically significant abnormalities (PCSAs) in vital signs, 12-lead electrocardiogram (12-ECG), and clinical laboratory parameters.

RESULTS

Of the 68 subjects enrolled, 67 were treated. Systemic exposure to rosuvastatin based on Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-∞ was similar in both treatments, with respective arithmetic values 12.4 ng/ml, 117 ng·h/mL, and 120 ng·h/mL for test formulation and 12.7 ng/ml, 120 ng·h/mL, and 123 ng·h/mL for reference formulations. Similarly, systemic exposure to unconjugated ezetimibe was 4.14 ng/ml, 89.7 ng·h/mL, and 102 ng·h/mL for the test formulation and 3.80 ng/ml, 89.7 ng·h/mL, and 102 ng·h/mL for reference formulations. Systemic exposure to total ezetimibe was 70.5 ng/ml, 664 ng·h/mL, and 718 ng·h/mL for test formulation and 60.2 ng/ml, 648 ng·h/mL, and 702 ng·h/mL for reference formulations. The point estimates for rosuvastatin unconjugated ezetimibe and total ezetimibe were in the acceptable range of 0.80-1.25. No deaths or serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixed dose combination of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin (10 mg/10 mg) achieved bioequivalence with reference to commercial tablets.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CTR20202108.

Effect of 1PC111, a Fixed-Dose Combination of Pitavastatin and Ezetimibe, Versus Pitavastatin or Ezetimibe Monotherapy on Lipid Profiles in Patients With Hypercholesterolemia or Mixed Dyslipidemia: A Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter, Phase III Study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to show that the efficacy of 1PC111 is superior to that of either ezetimibe or pitavastatin alone (monotherapy) for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, Phase III study. Patients with hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia were randomized to receive 1PC111 (which was a fixed-dose combination of pitavastatin 2 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg), pitavastatin 2 mg, or ezetimibe 10 mg daily for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the difference in the percent change in LDL-C from baseline to week 12 between the 1PC111 and each monotherapy group. The secondary end points were the percent change in other lipid profiles from baseline to each visit. All patients were assessed for adverse events until end of study.

FINDINGS

A total of 388 patients were randomly assigned to the 1PC111 (n = 128), pitavastatin (n = 132), or ezetimibe (n = 128) group. Generally, baseline characteristics were similar among the 3 groups. A statistically significant decrease in the LDL-C level at week 12 was observed in the 1PC111 group (-50.50% [14.9%]) compared with either the pitavastatin (-36.11% [11.4%]; P < 0.001) or ezetimibe (-19.85% [12.4%]; P < 0.001) group. Also, there was a statistically significant difference between 1PC111 and each monotherapy group in the reduction in total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B levels. Moreover, there was a trend toward more efficient lowering of LDL-C levels in elderly patients (age ≥65 years) than in younger patients (age <65 years) by 1PC111 treatment. In patients given a class I recommendation for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention, the percentage of patients achieving the LDL-C target of <100 mg/dL at week 12 was significantly higher in the 1PC111 group than in both monotherapy groups (P < 0.001). Overall, the incidence of adverse events was similar among 3 groups.

IMPLICATIONS

1PC111 was more effective in improving lipid profiles and achieving the LDL-C goal than pitavastatin or ezetimibe alone for hypercholesterolemia treatment. Furthermore, 1PC111 may provide more benefit in treating elderly patients.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov identifier: NCT04643093. (Clin Ther. 2022;44:XXX-XXX) © 2022 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc.

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.

Is it Time for Single-Pill Combinations in Dyslipidemia?

Despite the availability of lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) that are safe and effective, the overall rate of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) control at a population level in real-life studies is low. Higher-intensity treatment, earlier intervention, and longer-term treatment have all been shown to improve outcomes. However, in clinical practice, actual exposure to LLT is a product of the duration and intensity of, and adherence to, the treatment. To increase exposure to LLTs, the European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommended a stepwise optimization of LLTs by increasing statin intensity to the maximally tolerated dose, with subsequent addition of ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors. Evidence from randomized controlled trials performed in a range of patients suggested that adding ezetimibe to statins rather than doubling the statin dose resulted in significantly more patients at LDL-C goal and significantly fewer patients discontinuing treatment because of adverse events. In addition, data showed that combination treatments effectively increased exposure to LLT. Despite these data and recommendations, optimization of LLT is often limited to increasing statin dose. Therapeutic inertia and poor treatment adherence are significant and prevalent barriers to increasing treatment exposure. They are known to be influenced by pill burden and complexity of treatment. Single-pill combinations provide a strategic approach that supports the intensification of treatment without increasing pill burden or treatment complexity. Single-pill combinations, compared with free associations, have been shown to increase the adherence to LLT and the percentage of patients at LDL-C goal.

Comparative safety and efficacy of low- or moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy and high-intensity statin monotherapy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

Statin is highly recommended for dyslipidemia to prevent atherosclerosis-related cardiovascular diseases and death. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies and safeties of low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy. Meta-analysis was conducted on data included in published studies performed to compare the effects of the two treatments on lipid parameters and hs-CRP. Safety-related parameters were also evaluated. Eighteen articles were included in the meta-analysis. In terms of efficacy, low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe reduced LDL-C (SE = 0.307; 95% CI 0.153–0.463), TC (SE = 0.217; 95% CI 0.098–0.337), triglyceride (SE = 0.307; 95% CI 0.153–0.463), and hs-CRP (SE = 0.190; 95% CI 0.018–0.362) significantly more than high-intensity statin therapy. In terms of safety, the two treatments were not significantly different in terms of ALT elevation, but high-intensity statin increased AST and CK significantly more than combination therapy. This analysis indicates that low/moderate-intensity statin plus ezetimibe combined therapy is more effective and safer than high-intensity statin monotherapy, which suggests the addition of ezetimibe to statin should be preferred over increasing statin dose and that high-intensity statin should be used more carefully, especially in patients with related risks.

Tailoring Multi-omics to Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: All for One and One for All

Inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] has a multifactorial origin and originates from a complex interplay of environmental factors with the innate immune system at the intestinal epithelial interface in a genetically susceptible individual. All these factors make its aetiology intricate and largely unknown. Multi-omic datasets obtained from IBD patients are required to gain further insights into IBD biology. We here review the landscape of multi-omic data availability in IBD and identify barriers and gaps for future research. We also outline the various technical and non-technical factors that influence the utility and interpretability of multi-omic datasets and thereby the study design of any research project generating such datasets. Coordinated generation of multi-omic datasets and their systemic integration with clinical phenotypes and environmental exposures will not only enhance understanding of the fundamental mechanisms of IBD but also improve therapeutic strategies. Finally, we provide recommendations to enable and facilitate generation of multi-omic datasets.

Combine and Conquer: With Type 2 Diabetes Polypharmacy Is Essential Not Only to Achieve Glycemic Control but Also to Treat the Comorbidities and Stabilize or Slow the Advancement of Diabetic Nephropathy

The concept of polypharmacy in the type 2 diabetic patient is both historic and redundant. A combination of three or more medications usually at doses which are less than those utilized for monotherapy is efficacious not only in the therapy of hyperglycemia but also in the therapy of the comorbidities of hypertension and hyperlipidemia. In addition, multiple medications are now accepted as being necessary to reduce albuminuria and decelerate the decline in renal function in the patient with diabetic nephropathy.

Rosuvastatin and ezetimibe for the treatment of dyslipidemia and hypercholesterolemia

Introduction: Statins are powerful lipid-lowering agents which reduce cardiovascular (CV)-related morbidity and mortality. However, a large proportion of patients cannot attain the target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, despite receiving maximally tolerated doses of high-intensity statins. Also, adherence to treatment may be reduced due to statin-induced myopathy or other side effects. For these reasons, guidelines recommend adding the cholesterol absorption inhibitor ezetimibe.Areas covered: Authors discuss the main pharmacological characteristics of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe, their lipid-lowering and pleiotropic effects, as well as the clinical effects of the fixed dose combination of these drugs when used to treat dyslipidemia.Expert opinion: The rosuvastatin/ezetimibe combination is safe and effective in patients with hypercholesterolemia or dyslipidemia with or without diabetes and with or without cardiovascular disease. This drug combination enabled higher proportions of patients to achieve recommended LDL-C goals than rosuvastatin monotherapy or the simvastatin/ezetimibe combination, without additional adverse events. Despite the lack of additional CV outcomes data and comparisons with atorvastatin/ezetimibe, rosuvastatin/ezetimibe appears as a potent and generally well-tolerated drug combination eligible for the management of hypercholesterolemia and dyslipidemia in adults. Recently, the 40 mg rosuvastatin/10 mg ezetimibe fixed combination was approved and is also evaluated.

Fixed-dose combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe: treating hypercholesteremia according to cardiovascular risk

Introduction: Reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) with lipid-lowering therapies has been associated with a decrease in the frequency of cardiovascular events.Areas covered: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed (MEDLINE), using the MeSH terms [Rosuvastatin] + [Ezetimibe] + [Dyslipidemia] + [treatment]. Original data from clinical trials, prospective and retrospective studies and more useful reviews were selected.Expert opinion: While statins continue to be the cornerstone of dyslipidemia management, many patients do not attain LDL-C targets with high-intensity statins alone. Rosuvastatin is a high-intensity statin with a low risk of adverse effects and drug-drug interactions and proven benefits in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Rosuvastatin and ezetimibe have complementary mechanisms of action that enhance their ability to reduce LDL-C levels. Various studies have shown that the combination of rosuvastatin 10-40 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg enables considerable reductions in LDL-C (up to 60-75%) with a good safety profile in a broad spectrum of patients with hypercholesterolemia, including those at high risk and those with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. In addition, a fixed-dose combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe may improve adherence to medication. In this review, the available evidence on the combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe is updated.

Effect of Ezetimibe Added to High-Intensity Statin Therapy on Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Adding ezetimibe to high-intensity statin therapy is used for additional lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C); however, there are little data on the efficacy of ezetimibe when combined with a high-intensity statin. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of ezetimibe added to high-intensity statin therapy on LDL-C levels.

Methods

A literature search from database inception to May 2020 was performed using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were used in this meta-analysis, in which the random-effects model was adopted for the calculation of the mean difference (MD). The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias was used to evaluate the quality of the included trials.

Results

A total of 14 trials with 2,007 patients were included in this study. Compared to the high-intensity statin monotherapy, the MD in LDL-C reduction with high-intensity statin therapy plus ezetimibe was -14.00% (95% confidence interval: -17.78 to -10.22; P < 0.001) with a moderate degree of heterogeneity (P < 0.001, I² = 66%). No significant publication bias among the included trials was identified.

Conclusions

Our study found that adding ezetimibe to high-intensity statin therapy provided a significant but attenuated incremental reduction in LDL-C levels. Whether the magnitude of this additional lowering of LDL-C levels would lead to benefits in clinical cardiovascular outcomes needs further investigation.

Time-trend analysis of medicine sales and shortages during COVID-19 outbreak: Data from community pharmacies

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is a worldwide public health concern. Disruptions in the drug market are expected and shortages might worsen. Community pharmacies can contribute to early identification and report of medicines' supply and demand issues.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to characterize the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on outpatient medicines' sales and shortages.

METHODS

A retrospective, time-trend analysis of medicine sales, shortages and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases was performed from February 1st to April 30th, 2020, and its homologous period (regarding sales only). A detailed analysis of 6 pharmaceutical substances was performed. All data were subjected to rescaling using the min-max normalization method, in order to become comparable. Data analysis was performed using Microsoft® Excel.

RESULTS

The pandemic resulted in an increase in medicines' demand and reported shortages during the early stage of the outbreak. The maximum proportion of medicine sales was registered on March 13th, 2020, 4 days after the WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic. By the end of March, sales have already dropped to proportions similar to those of 2019. The maximum proportion of drug shortages was reached about one week after the sales peak and by the end of the study period were below those recorded in the pre-COVID-19 period. The analyzed drugs were paracetamol, ascorbic acid, dapagliflozin plus metformin, rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe, formoterol, and hydroxychloroquine, as these pharmaceutical substances registered the highest growth rate in sales and shortages when compared to the same period in the previous year. Hydroxychloroquine showed the most different pattern trends on sales and shortages of these medicines.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacies can provide timely and real-world data regarding sales and shortages. The adopted measures to guarantee the continuous supply of the medicine market seem to have worked. The long-term impacts of this pandemic are unknown and should continue to be closely monitored.

Combined use of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe improves hepatic steatosis in patients with dyslipidemia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe are beneficial for the management of dyslipidemia. We investigated whether rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe improves hepatic steatosis in patients with dyslipidemia.

METHODS

Between January and August 2018, 114 patients with dyslipidemia treated for 6 months with rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe were analyzed in this retrospective cohort study. The degree of hepatic steatosis was assessed using the hepatic steatosis index (HSI). Hepatic steatosis improvement and presence of fatty liver were defined as a ≥5% reduction in HSI score and HSI ≥36, respectively.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study population (50 males and 64 females) was 57.4 years. At baseline, the mean BMI total cholesterol level, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, triglyceride level, and HSI were 25.1 kg/m, 207.4 mg/dL, 126.1 mg/dL, 52.9 mg/dL, 146.4 mg/dL, and 36.1, respectively. During the 6-month treatment, hepatic steatosis burden was constant (mean HSI = 36.3 and 36.4 at 3 and 6 months, respectively). On multivariate analyses, ultrasonographic fatty liver and HSI ≥36 were selected as independent predictors of hepatic steatosis improvement. However, when 53 (46.5%) patients with fatty liver (HSI ≥ 36) were selected, hepatic steatosis burden was significantly improved (mean HSI = 40.8, 39.3, and 39.7 at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe for the management of dyslipidemia did not improve hepatic steatosis burden in all patients with dyslipidemia, but it improved hepatic steatosis burden in the subgroup with fatty liver.

GENetic characteristics and REsponse to lipid-lowering therapy in familial hypercholesterolemia: GENRE-FH study

Among the 146 patients enrolled in the Korean FH registry, 83 patients who had undergone appropriate LLT escalation and were followed-up for ≥ 6 months were analyzed for pathogenic variants (PVs). The achieved percentage of expected low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction (primary variable) and achievement rates of LDL-C < 70 mg/dL were assessed. The correlations between the treatment response and the characteristics of PVs, and the weighted 4 SNP-based score were evaluated. The primary variables were significantly lower in the PV-positive patients than in the PV-negative patients (p = 0.007). However, the type of PV did not significantly correlate with the primary variable. The achievement rates of LDL-C < 70 mg/dL was very low, regardless of the PV characteristics. Patients with a higher 4-SNP score showed a lower primary variable (R² = 0.045, p = 0.048). Among evolocumab users, PV-negative patients or those with only defective PVs revealed higher primary variable, whereas patients with at least one null PV showed lower primary variables. The adjusted response of patients with FH to LLT showed significant associations with PV positivity and 4-SNP score. These results may be helpful in managing FH patients with diverse genetic backgrounds.

Efficacy of Statin/Ezetimibe for Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Asian Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Several clinical trials have investigated the effect of statin/ezetimibe combination therapy on secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in the Asian population.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to summarize study results regarding the effect of statin/ezetimibe combination therapy on lipid parameters and highly sensitive C-reactive protein (HsCRP) biomarkers in ASCVD patients from Asian countries.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases for relevant papers published from 2008 to June 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that (1) were conducted in ASCVD patients in Asian countries; (2) examined the effects of statin/ezetimibe combination therapies compared with a control group; and (3) reported sufficient data on lipid parameters and HsCRP biomarkers. The results were reported as weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using random-effects models. Funnel plots and Egger's regression test were used to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-four RCTs were reviewed and 20 were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 4344 participants were included (n = 2197 in the intervention group and n = 2147 in the control group), and the intervention durations ranged from 6 weeks to 3.6 years. Ezetimibe coadministered with statin therapy, compared with control treatment, significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; n = 20 studies) [WMD  - 0.39 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.73 to - 0.05; p < 0.001], triglycerides (TG; n = 18 studies) [WMD - 0.23 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.33 to - 0.13; p < 0.001], and total cholesterol (TC; n = 17 studies) [WMD - 0.31 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.45 to - 0.17; p < 0.001). Although the effect of statin/ezetimibe combinations on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; n = 17 studies) [WMD 0.02 mmol/L, 95% CI - 0.05 to 0.09; p < 0.001) was very minimal and no effect was observed on HsCRP levels (n = 11 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study found that statin/ezetimibe combinations reduced LDL-C, TC, and TG levels but had minimal effects on HDL-C and no effect HsCRP biomarkers in ASCVD patients. The statin/ezetimibe therapy enabled a more effective reduction in LDL-C levels; however, the duration of the treatment was suboptimal.

Lipid-Lowering Efficacy and Safety of a New Generic Rosuvastatin in Koreans: an 8-Week Randomized Comparative Study with a Proprietary Rosuvastatin

Objective

The aim of this study was to investigate whether a new generic rosuvastatin is non-inferior to a proprietary one in terms of lipid-lowering efficacy. We also evaluated its non-lipid effects including adverse events.

Methods

One-hundred and fifty-eight patients with cardiovascular risks requiring pharmacological lipid-lowering therapy were screened. After a 4-week run-in period, 126 individuals who met the lipid criteria for drug therapy were randomly assigned to receive the new generic or proprietary rosuvastatin 10 mg daily for 8 weeks. The primary outcome variables were low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction and LDL-C target achievement. Hematological and biochemical parameters and adverse events were assessed.

Results

After 8 weeks of drug treatment, the mean percentage change in LDL-C was not different between the groups (−45.5%±19.9% and −45.1%±19.0% for generic and proprietary rosuvastatin, respectively; p=0.38). The LDL-C target achievement rate was similar between the groups (75.0% and 77.1% for generic and proprietary rosuvastatin, respectively; p=0.79). The percentage change in the other lipid profiles was not significantly different. Although generic- and proprietary rosuvastatins modestly affected creatine kinase and blood pressure, respectively, the changes were all within normal ranges. Incidence of adverse events did not differ between the receivers of the 2 formulations.

Conclusion

The new generic rosuvastatin was non-inferior to the proprietary rosuvastatin in terms of lipid-lowering efficacy. The rosuvastatin formulations did not exhibit clinically significant non-lipid effects with good safety profiles. Our study provides comprehensive data regarding 2 rosuvastatin formulations in East Asian subjects.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03949374

Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe: A Review in Hypercholesterolemia

Rosuvastatin/ezetimibe combines two lipid-lowering agents: rosuvastatin, an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (i.e. statin) with particularly strong inhibitory effects on hepatic cholesterol synthesis, and ezetimibe, which inhibits the intestinal absorption of cholesterol. A fixed-dose combination (FDC) of rosuvastatin/ezetimibe is indicated as an adjunctive therapy to diet for the management of primary hypercholesterolemia in adults in numerous countries worldwide. In well-designed clinical trials evaluating the therapeutic efficacy of rosuvastatin/ezetimibe administered as either separate agents or as an FDC, rosuvastatin/ezetimibe was significantly more effective than rosuvastatin monotherapy (including at double the dose of rosuvastatin) or simvastatin/ezetimibe in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and total cholesterol in adults with hypercholesterolemia. Furthermore, rosuvastatin/ezetimibe enabled significantly higher proportions of patients to achieve recommended LDL-C levels than rosuvastatin monotherapy or simvastatin/ezetimibe. Rosuvastatin/ezetimibe did not significantly differ from rosuvastatin monotherapy with respect to incidences of treatment-related or serious adverse events in these short-term trials and displayed a similar safety profile to simvastatin/ezetimibe. While additional cardiovascular outcomes data and head-to-head comparisons with atorvastatin/ezetimibe would be of interest, rosuvastatin/ezetimibe is a potent and generally well-tolerated drug combination that extends the range of options available for the pharmacological management of primary hypercholesterolemia in adults.

The efficacy and safety of statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with double-dose statin in patients with high cardiovascular risk: A meta-analysis

Currently, statins are the first-line therapies for dyslipidemia and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, however, their hypolipidemic effects have not been satisfactory. We performed a meta-analysis to compare lipid-lowering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and statin combination therapy with double-dose statin monotherapy in patients with high cardiovascular risk. Fourteen studies involving 3105 participants were included in the final analysis; 1558 (50.18%) participants received ezetimibe and statin combination therapy and 1547 (49.82%) received double-dose statin monotherapy. Eight studies reported the percentages of changes in several lipid parameters from baseline to endpoint in both groups. Lipid parameters changed more significantly in patients coadministered with ezetimibe and statin (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C]: MD = -9.39, 95% CI -13.36 to -5.42; non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [non-HDL-C]: MD = -10.36, 95% CI -14.23 to -6.50; total cholesterol [TC]: MD = -8.11, 95% CI -10.95 to -5.26; and triglyceride [TG]: MD = -5.96, 95% CI -9.12 to -2.80), with moderate to high heterogeneity among the studies. Two out of fourteen studies investigated several different statins. Our subgroup analysis showed that, compared with double-dose atorvastatin monotherapy, ezetimibe and atorvastatin combination therapy significantly decreased LDL-C, non-HDL-C, TC, and TG levels by 14.16%, 14.01%, 11.06%, and 5.96%, respectively (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found in the incidence of laboratory-related adverse events (AEs) between statin combination therapy and monotherapy. Overall, ezetimibe and statin combination therapy significantly decreased LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and TC levels in patients with high cardiovascular risk, among which ezetimibe combined with atorvastatin had the best therapeutic effect. Compared with ezetimibe and statin combination therapy, double-dose statin monotherapy did not increase the risk of AEs.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Rosuvastatin Monotherapy 20 mg with Rosuvastatin 5 mg and Ezetimibe 10 mg Combination Therapy on Lipid Parameters in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

The apolipoprotein B/A1 (apoB/A1) ratio is a stronger predictor of future cardiovascular disease than is the level of conventional lipids. Statin and ezetimibe combination therapy have shown additional cardioprotective effects over statin monotherapy.

METHODS

This was a single-center, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study in Korea. A total of 36 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomized to either rosuvastatin monotherapy (20 mg/day, n=20) or rosuvastatin/ezetimibe (5 mg/10 mg/day, n=16) combination therapy for 6 weeks.

RESULTS

After the 6-week treatment, low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and apoB reduction were comparable between the two groups (-94.3±15.4 and -62.0±20.9 mg/dL in the rosuvastatin group, -89.9±22.7 and -66.8±21.6 mg/dL in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group, P=0.54 and P=0.86, respectively). In addition, change in apoB/A1 ratio (-0.44±0.16 in the rosuvastatin group and -0.47±0.25 in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group, P=0.58) did not differ between the two groups. On the other hand, triglyceride and free fatty acid (FFA) reductions were greater in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group than in the rosuvastatin group (-10.5 mg/dL [interquartile range (IQR), -37.5 to 29.5] and 0.0 μEq/L [IQR, -136.8 to 146.0] in the rosuvastatin group, -49.5 mg/dL [IQR, -108.5 to -27.5] and -170.5 μEq/L [IQR, -353.0 to 0.8] in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group, P=0.010 and P=0.049, respectively). Both treatments were generally well tolerated, and there were no differences in muscle or liver enzyme elevation.

CONCLUSION

A 6-week combination therapy of low-dose rosuvastatin and ezetimibe showed LDL-C, apoB, and apoB/A1 ratio reduction comparable to that of high-dose rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Triglyceride and FFA reductions were greater with the combination therapy than with rosuvastatin monotherapy.

A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Active Comparator Clinical Trial to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy With Ezetimibe and Rosuvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin Monotherapy in Patients With Hypercholesterolemia: I-ROSETTE (Ildong Rosuvastatin & Ezetimibe for Hypercholesterolemia) Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Combination therapy with ezetimibe and statins is recommended in cases of statin intolerance or insufficiency. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with ezetimibe and rosuvastatin versus those of rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

I-ROSETTE (Ildong ROSuvastatin & ezETimibe for hypercholesTElolemia) was an 8-week, double-blind, multicenter, Phase III randomized controlled trial conducted at 20 hospitals in the Republic of Korea. Patients with hypercholesterolemia who required medical treatment according to National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines were eligible for participation in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ezetimibe 10 mg/rosuvastatin 20 mg, ezetimibe 10 mg/rosuvastatin 10 mg, ezetimibe 10 mg/rosuvastatin 5 mg, rosuvastatin 20 mg, rosuvastatin 10 mg, or rosuvastatin 5 mg in a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio. The primary end point was the difference in the mean percent change from baseline in LDL-C level after 8 weeks of treatment between the ezetimibe/rosuvastatin and rosuvastatin treatment groups. All patients were assessed for adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory data, and vital signs.

FINDINGS

Of 396 patients, 389 with efficacy data were analyzed. Baseline characteristics among 6 groups were similar. After 8 weeks of double-blind treatment, the percent changes in adjusted mean LDL-C levels at week 8 compared with baseline values were -57.0% (2.1%) and -44.4% (2.1%) in the total ezetimibe/rosuvastatin and total rosuvastatin groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The LDL-C-lowering efficacy of each of the ezetimibe/rosuvastatin combinations was superior to that of each of the respective doses of rosuvastatin. The mean percent change in LDL-C level in all ezetimibe/rosuvastatin combination groups was >50%. The number of patients who achieved target LDL-C levels at week 8 was significantly greater in the ezetimibe/rosuvastatin group (180 [92.3%] of 195 patients) than in the rosuvastatin monotherapy group (155 [79.9%] of 194 patients) (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the incidence of overall AEs, adverse drug reactions, and serious AEs; laboratory findings, including liver function test results and creatinine kinase levels, were comparable between groups.

IMPLICATIONS

Fixed-dose combinations of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin significantly improved lipid profiles in patients with hypercholesterolemia compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy. All groups treated with rosuvastatin and ezetimibe reported a decrease in mean LDL-C level >50%. The safety and tolerability of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin therapy were comparable with those of rosuvastatin monotherapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02749994.

Strategies for the use of nonstatin therapies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Dyslipidaemias are a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD); in particular, high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) have been associated to a higher cardiovascular risk. Reducing LDL-C levels decreases the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), and the greater the LDL-C reduction, the greater the decrease in cardiovascular risk. Although statins represent the first line lipid-lowering therapy, many patients do not reach the recommended goals or exhibit adverse side effects leading to therapy discontinuation; in addition, a significant percentage of statin-treated patients continue to experience cardiovascular events even in the presence of well controlled LDL-C levels, because of alterations in other lipid/lipoprotein classes, including triglycerides and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

RECENT FINDINGS

These conditions require further therapeutic interventions to achieve the recommended lipid goals. Several drugs have been developed to address these needs. Recent studies have shown that the association of ezetimibe with rosuvastatin or atorvastatin results in a better hypolipidaemic effect; in addition to this, PCSK9 inhibitors significantly reduce LDL-C levels and cardiovascular events.

SUMMARY

For patients who are intolerant to statins or not able to reach the recommended LDL-C levels, despite maximal tolerated dose of statin, or exhibiting additional lipid alterations, several drugs are available that can be used either in monotherapy or on top of the maximally tolerated dose of statins.

Investigational therapies for hypercholesterolemia

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality are of increasing concern, not only to patients but also to the health care profession and service providers. The preventative benefit of treatment of dyslipidaemia is unquestioned but there is a large, so far unmet need to improve clinical outcome. There are exciting new discoveries of targets that may translate into improved clinical outcome. Areas covered: This review highlights some new pathways in cholesterol and triglyceride metabolism and examines new targets, new drugs and new molecules. The review includes the results of recent trials of relatively new drugs that have shown benefit in cardiovascular endpoint outcomes, drugs that have been licenced without endpoint trials yet available and new drugs that have not yet been licenced but have produced exciting results in animal studies and some in early phase 2 human studies. Expert opinion: The new areas that have been discovered as the cause of dyslipidaemia have opened up a host of new targets for new drugs including antisense RNA's, microRNA's and human monoclonal antibodies. The plethora of new targets and new drugs has made it an extraordinarily exciting time in the development of therapeutics to combat atherosclerosis.