Comparison of pitavastatin with atorvastatin in increasing HDL-cholesterol and adiponectin in patients with dyslipidemia and coronary artery disease: The COMPACT-CAD study

The role of adiponectin in cardiovascular disease

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a common disease that seriously threatens the health of human beings, especially middle-aged and elderly people over 50 years old. It has the characteristics of high prevalence, high disability rate and high mortality rate. Previous studies have shown that adiponectin has therapeutic effects on a variety of CVDs. As a key adipokine, adiponectin, is an abundant peptide-regulated hormone that is mainly released by adipocytes and cardiomyocytes, as well as endothelial and skeletal cells. Adiponectin can protect against CVD by improving lipid metabolism, protecting vascular endothelial cells and inhibiting foam cell formation and vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation. Further investigation of the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying the adiponectin system may provide new ideas for the treatment of CVD. Herein, this review aims to describe the structure and function of adiponectin and adiponectin receptors, introduce the function of adiponectin in the protection of cardiovascular disease and analyze the potential use and clinical significance of this hormone in the protection and treatment of cardiovascular disease, which shows that adiponectin can be expected to become a new therapeutic target and biomarker for the diagnosis and treatment of CVD.

A review of effects of atorvastatin in cancer therapy

Cancer is one of the most challenging diseases to manage. A sizeable number of researches are done each year to find better diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. At the present time, a package of chemotherapy, targeted therapy, radiotherapy, and immunotherapy is available to cope with cancer cells. Regarding chemo-radiation therapy, low effectiveness and normal tissue toxicity are like barriers against optimal response. To remedy the situation, some agents have been proposed as adjuvants to improve tumor responses. Statins, the known substances for reducing lipid, have shown a considerable capability for cancer treatment. Among them, atorvastatin as a reductase (HMG-CoA) inhibitor might affect proliferation, migration, and survival of cancer cells. Since finding an appropriate adjutant is of great importance, numerous studies have been conducted to precisely unveil antitumor effects of atorvastatin and its associated pathways. In this review, we aim to comprehensively review the most highlighted studies which focus on the use of atorvastatin in cancer therapy.

Mini-Review on the efficacy and safety of pitavastatin: “The novel seventh statin gaining momentum”

Background:

Recently, a plethora of events have affected the statin arena such as muscle-induced myalgia, myopathy, myositis, rare rhabdomyolysis, and new-onset diabetes. The latest statin pitavastatin has emerged with descent stamina (optimum efficacy and improved safety).

Objective:

The objective of the current review is to explore the pros and cons of pitavastatin as a novel second-generation statin in terms of efficacy and safety that delineate its clinical utility.

Methods:

The review was conducted via EBSCO hosted Medline search (AL Ain University, UAE subscription) for relevant English written literature articles containing “pitavastatin” as the primary search term “pitavastatin and safety;” “pitavastatin and efficacy” and “pitavastatin and safety and randomized clinical trials;” and “pitavastatin and efficacy and randomized clinical trials.”

Results:

The number of articles containing the word “pitavastatin” as the primary search term used was (n = 901). The next retrieves MeSH term was “pitavastatin and safety” (n = 99) and then “pitavastatin and efficacy” (n = 132). Furthermore, narrowing down the search by adding study design terms revealed: “pitavastatin and safety and randomized clinical trials,” (n = 10) and “pitavastatin and efficacy and randomized clinical trials” (n = 13). Combining the two main searches (safety and efficacy) has yielded 23 items, of which 15 articles were satisfying the current mini-review criteria. The prominent efficacy of pitavastatin was depicted by the increase in high-dense lipoprotein cholesterol and a decrease in low-dense lipoprotein cholesterol as illustrated by the clinical trials in the results and discussions section. The safety was enlightened with a very low propensity to cause new-onset diabetes and a low tendency for statin-induced muscular adverse events.

Conclusion:

Pitavastatin might be suitable for patients with the acute coronary syndrome (ACS), metabolic syndrome, and patients with diabetes. We highly recommend rational individualization for the selection of statin, especially in patients with diabetes and/or with ACS.

A comprehensive review on the lipid and pleiotropic effects of pitavastatin

The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, or statins, are administered as first line therapy for hypercholesterolemia, both in primary and secondary prevention. There is a growing body of evidence showing that beyond their lipid-lowering effect, statins have a number of additional beneficial properties. Pitavastatin is a unique lipophilic statin with a strong effect on lowering plasma total cholesterol and triacylglycerol. It has been reported to have pleiotropic effects such as decreasing inflammation and oxidative stress, regulating angiogenesis and osteogenesis, improving endothelial function and arterial stiffness, and reducing tumor progression. Based on the available studies considering the risk of statin-associated muscle symptoms it seems to be also the safest statin. The unique lipid and non-lipid effects of pitavastatin make this molecule a particularly interesting option for the management of different human diseases. In this review, we first summarized the lipid effects of pitavastatin and then strive to unravel the diverse pleiotropic effects of this molecule.

Consumption and market share of cholesterol-lowering drugs in high-risk patients before and after the release of the 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol guidelines: a retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

We examined the use of cholesterol-lowering drugs in Taiwan in high-risk patients before and after the release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cholesterol guidelines.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING

Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital database, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.

PARTICIPANTS

Outpatients aged ≥20 years with atherosclerosis cardiovascular disease, familial hypercholesterolaemia and diabetes.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Data on brand and generic names, use and dosage of cholesterol-lowering drugs in 2012 and 2015 were compiled and the total amount used was calculated. Differences in usage and market share were compared. Usage rates of single and fixed-dose combination (FDC) products were compared.

RESULTS

The number of patients receiving ambulatory care increased from 36 367 in 2012 to 41 807 in 2015. Single (3 679 979-4 568 086 tablets) and FDC (540 522-572 954 tablets) product use increased from 2012 to 2015, respectively. Statins were the most commonly prescribed medications in 2012 (71.14%) and 2015 (72.91%). The average monthly consumption of statin among high-risk patients in 2012 was 269 948.8 tablets, and it increased significantly to 343 975.3 tablets in 2015. The average monthly consumption of pitavastatin was 34 113.4 tablets in 2015, which was significantly higher than 0 in 2012. Conversely, the highest decline was observed for fluvastatin use, with the average monthly consumption being 38 754.3 tablets in 2015, which was significantly lower than 45 929.8 tablets consumed in 2012. Regarding FDC therapy for cholesterol-lowering drugs, Vytorin (ezetimibe 10 mg + simvastatin 20 mg) use was the highest among all FDCs in 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol guidelines likely promoted the use of fixed-dose, high-intensity and moderate-intensity monotherapy and FDC therapy statins in high-risk groups, and this was consistent with the use of high-intensity or moderate-intensity statins in the present study. Furthermore, these changes were associated with increased effectiveness and reduced adverse effects.

Outcome of pitavastatin versus atorvastatin therapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

There has been no report about outcome of pitavastatin versus atorvastatin therapy in high-risk patients with hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

Hypercholesterolemic patients with one or more risk factors for atherosclerotic diseases (n = 664, age = 65, male = 54%, diabetes = 76%, primary prevention = 74%) were randomized to receive pitavastatin 2 mg/day (n = 332) or atorvastatin 10 mg/day (n = 332). Follow-up period was 240 weeks. The primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, sudden death of unknown origin, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, transient ischemic attack, or heart failure requiring hospitalization. The secondary end point was a composite of the primary end point plus clinically indicated coronary revascularization for stable angina.

RESULTS

The mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level at baseline was 149 mg/dL. The mean LDL-C levels at 1 year were 95 mg/dL in the pitavastatin group and 94 mg/dL in the atorvastatin group. There were no differences in LDL-C levels between both groups, however, pitavastatin significantly reduced the risk of the primary end point, compared to atorvastatin (pitavastatin = 2.9% and atorvastatin = 8.1%, HR, 0.366; 95% CI 0.170-0.787; P = 0.01 by multivariate Cox regression) as well as the risk of the secondary end point (pitavastatin = 4.5% and atorvastatin = 12.9%, HR = 0.350; 95%CI = 0.189-0.645, P = 0.001). The results for the primary and secondary end points were consistent across several prespecified subgroups. There were no differences in incidence of adverse events between the statins.

CONCLUSION

Pitavastatin therapy compared with atorvastatin more may prevent cardiovascular events in hypercholesterolemic patients with one or more risk factors for atherosclerotic diseases despite similar effects on LDL-C levels.

Differential Diabetogenic Effect of Pitavastatin and Rosuvastatin, in vitro and in vivo

Aim: Most statins increase the risk of new-onset diabetes. Unlike other statins, pitavastatin is reported to exert neutral effects on serum glucose level, but the precise mechanism is unknown.

Methods: Eight-week-old male C57BL/6J mice (n = 26) were fed high-fat diet (HFD, 45% fat) with 0.01% placebo, rosuvastatin, or pitavastatin for 12 weeks. Cultured HepG2, C2C12, and 3T3-L1 cells and visceral adipocytes from HFD-fed mice were treated with vehicle or 10 µM statins for 24 h. The effects of pitavastatin and rosuvastatin on intracellular insulin signaling and glucose transporter 4 (GLUT4) translocation were evaluated.

Results: After 12 weeks, the fasting blood glucose level was significantly lower in pitavastatin-treated group than in rosuvastatin-treated group (115.2 ± 7.0 versus 137.4 ± 22.3 mg/dL, p = 0.024). Insulin tolerance significantly improved in pitavastatin-treated group as compared with rosuvastatin-treated group, and no significant difference was observed in glucose tolerance. Although plasma adiponectin and insulin levels were not different between the two statin treatment groups, the insulin-induced protein kinase B phosphorylation was weakly attenuated in pitavastatin-treated adipocytes than in rosuvastatin-treated adipocytes. Furthermore, minor attenuation in insulin-induced GLUT4 translocation to the plasma membrane of adipocytes was observed in pitavastatin-treated group.

Conclusion: Pitavastatin showed lower diabetogenic effects than rosuvastatin in mice that may be mediated by minor attenuations in insulin signaling in adipocytes.

Effect of Pitavastatin Compared with Atorvastatin andRosuvastatin on New-Onset Diabetes Mellitus in PatientsWith Acute Myocardial Infarction

Although statin use in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is mandatory, it has been suggested to be associated with new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM). In real world practice, moderate-intensity statin therapy is more commonly used than high-intensity statin therapy. In this study, we investigated the impact of moderate-intensity pitavastatin (2 to 4 mg) compared with moderate-intensity atorvastatin (10 to 20 mg) and rosuvastatin (5 to 10 mg) on the development of NODM during a follow-up period of up to 3years. Between November 2011 and May 2015, 2001 patients with AMI who did not have diabetes mellitus were investigated. The cumulative incidence of NODM was evaluated in all groups. To adjust for potential confounders, multinomial propensity scores were used. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the hazard ratio of NODM in the atorvastatin and rosuvastatin groups compared with pitavastatin group. The cumulative incidence of NODM was significantly lower in pitavastatin group compared with the atorvastatin and rosuvastatin groups (3.0% vs 8.4% vs 10.4%, respectively; Log-rank p value = 0.001). After weighting the baseline characteristics of the 3 statin groups by multinomial propensity scores, atorvastatin (hazard ratio: 2.615, 95% confidence interval: 1.163 to 5.879) and rosuvastatin (hazard ratio: 3.906, 95% confidence interval: 1.756 to 8.688) were found to be associated with a higher incidence of NODM compared with pitavastatin therapy on multivariable analysis. Moderate-intensity pitavastatin therapy is associated with a lower incidence of NODM in patients with AMI andhas similar clinical outcomes to moderate-intensity atorvastatin and rosuvastatin therapy.

Long-term Effects of high-doSe pitavaStatin on Diabetogenicity in comparison with atorvastatin in patients with Metabolic syndrome (LESS-DM): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The diabetogenic action of statins remains a concern, particularly in patients at high risk for diabetes receiving intensive statin therapy. Despite the risk of diabetes with statin use being considered a potential class effect, recent studies have suggested that pitavastatin exerts neutral or favorable effects on diabetogenicity. However, no randomized trial has compared the long-term effects of pitavastatin with those of other statins on glycemic control in populations at high risk for diabetes. Hence, we aim to assess the long-term effects of pitavastatin in comparison with atorvastatin on glucose metabolism in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS).

Methods/design

The Long-term Effects of high-doSe pitavaStatin on Diabetogenicity in comparison with atorvastatin in patients with Metabolic syndrome (LESS-DM) trial is a prospective, randomized, open-label, active control clinical trial of patients with MetS. We plan to randomize 500 patients with MetS (1:1) to receive high-dose pitavastatin (4 mg) or atorvastatin (20 mg) daily for 24 months. The primary endpoint will be the change in hemoglobin A1c after statin treatment. Secondary endpoints will include the following: (1) changes in biochemical markers, including insulin, C-peptide, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance and insulin secretion, and adiponectin; (2) changes in imaging parameters, including carotid elasticity metrics and indices of cardiac function; and (3) the incidence of clinical events, including new-onset diabetes and cardiovascular disease.

Discussion

In this trial, we will explore whether pitavastatin 4 mg does not disturb glucose metabolism in patients with MetS. It will also provide mechanistic information on statin type-dependent diabetogenic effects and surrogate data regarding vascular and cardiac changes achieved by intensive statin therapy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02940366. Registered on 19 October 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2229-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Effects of Rosuvastatin Alone or in Combination with Omega-3 Fatty Acid on Adiponectin Levels and Cardiometabolic Profile

BACKGROUND

Adiponectin is an important adipocyte-related protein that has been postulated to participate in prevention of the development of metabolic syndrome. The relationship between adiponectin serum levels and risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) has been widely investigated and remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of rosuvastatin and/or omega-3 fatty acid on adiponectin serum levels in patients with insulin resistance (IR) and CAD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study involved 87 patients with CADs and IR of different etiology, the patients were divided into three groups; 24 patients on treatment with rosuvastatin, 22 patients on treatment with omega-3 fatty acid, 23 patients on treatment with omega-3 fatty acid and rosuvastatin, 18 patients were not previously or currently treated with either rosuvastatin or omega-3 fatty acid, those regarded as control patients. Anthropometric measures, adiponectin serum levels, and other biochemical parameters were assessed in each treated group.

RESULTS

Rosuvastatin therapy leads to a significant elevation in adiponectin serum levels from 4.1 ± 0.99 ng/mL to 6.76 ± 1.03 ng/mL compared to control P < 0.01. Omega-3 fatty acid therapy leads to a significant elevation in adiponectin serum levels from 4.1 ± 0.99 ng/mL to 6.11 ± 1.29 ng/mL compared to control P < 0.01. Rosuvastatin plus omega-3 fatty acid therapy lead to a significant elevation in adiponectin serum levels from 4.1 ± 0.99 ng/mL to 7.99 ± 1.76 ng/mL compared to control P < 0.01.

CONCLUSIONS

Rosuvastatin and/or omega-3 fatty acid lead to significant cardiometabolic protection through an increment in adiponectin serum levels.

Statins and risk for new-onset diabetes mellitus: A real-world cohort study using a clinical research database

Although concern regarding the increased risk for new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) after statin treatment has been raised, there has been a lack of evidence in real-world clinical practice, particularly in East Asians. We investigated whether statin use is associated with risk for NODM in Koreans. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the clinical research database from electronic health records. The study cohort consisted of 8265 statin-exposed and 33,060 matched nonexposed patients between January 1996 and August 2013. Matching at a 1:4 ratio was performed using a propensity score based on age, gender, baseline glucose levels (mg/dL), and hypertension. The comparative risks for NODM with various statins (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, pitavastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin) were estimated by both statin exposure versus matched nonexposed and within-class comparisons. The incidence of NODM among the statin-exposed group (6.000 per 1000 patient-years [PY]) was higher than that of the nonexposed group (3.244 per 1000 PY). The hazard ratio (HR) of NODM after statin exposure was 1.872 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.432-2.445). Male gender (HR, 1.944; 95% CI, 1.497-2.523), baseline glucose per mg/dL (HR, 1.014; 95% CI, 1.013-1.016), hypertension (HR, 2.232; 95% CI, 1.515-3.288), and thiazide use (HR, 1.337; 95% CI, 1.081-1.655) showed an increased risk for NODM, while angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker showed a decreased risk (HR, 0.774; 95% CI, 0.668-0.897). Atorvastatin-exposed patients showed a higher risk for NODM than their matched nonexposed counterparts (HR, 1.939; 95% CI, 1.278-2.943). However, the risk for NODM was not significantly different among statins in within-class comparisons. In conclusion, an increased risk for NODM was observed among statin users in a practical healthcare setting in Korea.

Clinical benefits of pitavastatin: focus on patients with diabetes or at risk of developing diabetes

Despite attaining LDL-cholesterol targets, many patients with diabetes remain at risk of developing cardiovascular events. In addition, treatment with statins has been associated with a slight but significant increased risk of development of diabetes, particularly with high-intensity statins. Pitavastatin is a moderate- to high-intensity statin that effectively reduces LDL-cholesterol levels. Pitavastatin provides a sustained increase of HDL-cholesterol levels that may exhibit a neutral or positive effect on glucose metabolism, may not increase the risk of new-onset diabetes, may exhibit positive effects on renal function and urinary albumin excretion and the risk of drug–drug interactions is low. Therefore, it seems that pitavastatin should preferentially be considered in the treatment of dyslipidemia in diabetic patients or at risk of developing diabetes.

Statin use and the risk of developing diabetes: a network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Randomized controlled trials have shown mixed findings regarding the association of statins and diabetes. This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to update evidence on this association to possibly assist clinicians in making more informed treatment choices.

METHODS

We identified studies relevant to our NMA by performing study searches in databases like Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed, published between August 2010 and June 2014. Pre-2010 studies were identified from bibliography of previously published meta-analyses. Unpublished study data were found from clinicaltrial.gov. Data synthesis was performed by pairwise meta-analysis and NMA within a Frequentist framework.

RESULTS

Twenty nine trials in which 1 63 039 participants had been randomized were included in this review; among these 1 41 863 were non-diabetic patients. The direct meta-analysis showed that statins, as a class, significantly increased the likelihood of developing diabetes by 12% (pooled OR 1.12; 95%CI 1.05-1.21; I² 36%; p = 0.002; 18 RCTs). In the NMA, atorvastatin 80 mg was associated with a highest risk of diabetes, with OR of 1.34 (95%CI 1.14-1.57) followed by rosuvastatin (OR: 1.17; 95%CI: 1.02-1.35). The ORs (95%CIs) for simvastatin 80 mg, simvastatin, atorvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin and pitavastatin were 1.21 (0.99-1.49), 1.13 (0.99-1.29), 1.13 (0.94-1.34), 1.04 (0.93-1.16), 0.98 (0.69-1.38) and 0.74 (0.31-1.77), respectively. High-dose atorvastatin increased the odds of developing diabetes even when compared with pravastatin, simvastatin and low-dose atorvastatin in the NMA.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results, statins, as a class, increased the risk of diabetes significantly in the pairwise meta-analysis. Overall, there appears to be a small increased risk of incident diabetes, particularly with more intensive statin therapy, although more data would be valuable to increase the robustness of this interpretation, given that the lower confidence intervals of our study analyses are close to, or just crossing one. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Dyslipidemia is associated with an increased risk of nephrolithiasis

The pathophysiology of nephrolithiasis is multifactorial. Obesity, diabetes mellitus and hypertension are implicated in its formation. Dyslipidemia (DLD) recently has received attention as well. Congruent with a vascular etiology in stone formation, DLD theoretically would predispose patients to nephrolithiasis. We investigated a possible association of DLD with nephrolithiasis. A random cohort of 60,000 patients was established by collecting the first 5,000 patient charts per month in the year 2000. After excluding pediatric patients, a retrospective study was performed by reviewing age, sex, comorbidities, and last patient follow-up. Median lipid laboratory levels also were reviewed. Descriptive statistics were performed as well as Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis, and univariate and multivariate analyses. 52,184 (22,717 women/29,467 men) patient charts were reviewed. The average age was 31.0 ± 15.2 years. On univariate analysis, DLD was associated with nephrolithiasis with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.2 [Confidence Interval (CI), 1.9-2.5; p < 0.001] and on multivariate analysis HR = 1.2 (1.0-1.5; p = 0.033). Low-density lipoprotein and triglycerides had no association with stone disease. Patients with high-density lipoprotein (HDL) values <45 for men and <60 for women had an HR of 1.4 (1.1-1.7, 95% CI, p = 0.003) on univariate analysis and on multivariate analysis; HR = 1.27 (1.03-1.56; p = 0.024) for nephrolithiasis. DLD was associated with an increased risk of stone disease though the only specific lipid panel associated with lower nephrolithiasis was HDL. Clinicians should consider obtaining lipid levels with the intent that treatment could potentially not only mitigate atherosclerotic disease but also decrease nephrolithiasis risk.

Role of epicardial adipose tissue in coronary artery disease in non-obese patients

BACKGROUND

Epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) surrounding the heart may contribute to the development of coronary artery disease (CAD) through its local secretion of adipocytokines. Although the quantity of EAT is associated with obesity and metabolic syndrome, the role of EAT in the development of CAD in non-obese patients remains to be determined.

METHODS

This study included 41 patients with CAD who underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery and 28 patients without CAD who underwent other cardiac surgery. EAT volume was measured by 64-slice multi-detector computed tomography before the surgery. We obtained pericardial fluid and epicardial and subcutaneous adipose tissue samples at the surgery. We investigated the relationship between EAT volume and adiponectin levels in pericardial fluid and incident CAD in patients with and without obesity (body mass index>25 kg/m(2)).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in EAT volume between obese patients with and without CAD (55.5 ± 40.2 mL vs. 40.1 ± 19.7 mL, p=0.323). However, EAT volume was significantly greater in non-obese patients with CAD compared to those without CAD (35.0 ± 18.8 mL vs. 15.7 ± 11.0 mL, p<0.001). Adiponectin concentrations in pericardial fluid were significantly lower in non-obese patients with CAD compared to those without CAD (2.7 ± 2.0 μg/mL vs. 4.3 ± 3.7 μg/mL, p=0.049), whereas the adiponectin levels were decreased in obese patients regardless of the presence of CAD. Non-obese patients with CAD had significantly larger size adipocytes in EAT but not subcutaneous adipose tissue compared to those without CAD. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that increased EAT volume was independently associated with incident CAD in non-obese patients.

CONCLUSION

Increased EAT may play a crucial role in development of CAD through impairment of adiponectin secretion in non-obese patients.

Preloading with atorvastatin before percutaneous coronary intervention in statin-naïve Asian patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes: A randomized study

BACKGROUND

Data on atorvastatin pretreatment in Asian patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are limited. However, there have been studies in other populations in Asia which demonstrated that statins can reduce the risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Statin-naïve patients with non-ST-segment-elevation (NSTE)-ACS scheduled for PCI were randomized to usual care or atorvastatin preloading groups. All patients received usual care including atorvastatin 40 mg/day. The atorvastatin group received atorvastatin 80 mg 12 h and 40 mg 2 h pre-PCI. Of 499 patients randomized, 247 were assigned to atorvastatin preloading. Following coronary angiography, 335 patients (163 atorvastatin) received PCI. During the 30 days post-PCI, major adverse cardiac events (death, MI, and target vessel revascularization) occurred in 24 (15%) atorvastatin and 27 (16%) usual care patients (p=NS). Post hoc analyses showed that at 8 h post-PCI, 3.82% of the atorvastatin group and 7.22% of the usual care group had a post-procedural creatine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB) above 3 times the upper limit of normal (p=0.27) and at 24 h post-PCI, the rate was 7.64% versus 9.47% (p=1.0). Safety profile suggests that high-dose atorvastatin (40 mg) for up to 1 month, in conjunction with usual care, is relatively safe and well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

This study of statin-naïve Korean and Chinese patients with NSTE-ACS who received additional atorvastatin loading doses of 80 mg at 12 h, and 40 mg at 2 h, pre-PCI did not find a beneficial effect compared with usual post-PCI atorvastatin 40 mg/day treatment. Atorvastatin was found to be well tolerated in Asian patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing PCI. Results of the current study merit further investigation of the early use of statins in patients with NSTE-ACS to delineate patient subgroups who may benefit from this therapy.