Myocardial infarction: ACE inhibitors for all? For ever?

Effect of statin therapy on the progression of coronary atherosclerosis

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of authors employing intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and virtual histology (VH-IVUS) have investigated the effect of statin use on plaque volume (PV) and plaque composition. However, inconsistent results have been reported. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine the appropriate regimen of statins to effectively stabilize vulnerable coronary plaques.

METHODS

Online electronic databases were carefully searched for all relevant studies. We compared mean values of PV and plaque composition between baseline and follow-up in patients receiving statin therapy. We pooled treatment effects and calculated mean differences (MD) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. By stratified analyses, we explored the influence of clinical presentation, dose and duration of statin treatment, and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels on the effects of statins.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies involving 2,171 patients were analyzed. Statin therapy significantly decreased PV (-5.3 mm(3); 95% CI: -3.3 mm(3) to -7.2 mm(3) P < 0.001), without heterogeneity. When considering the dose and duration of statins used, only subgroups employing a high dose and long duration demonstrated a significant reduction in PV (p < 0.001). A significant decrease in PV was noted if achieved LDL-C levels were <100 mg/dL (p < 0.001). Statin treatment could induce a twofold decrease in PV in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) compared with that observed in patients with stable angina pectoris (SAP). A regressive trend was seen for necrotic core volume (MD: -2.1 mm(3); 95% CI: -4.7 mm(3) to 0.5 mm(3), P = 0.11). However, statin use did not induce a significant change for fibrotic, fibro-fatty, or dense calcium compositions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated that statin therapy (especially that involving a high dose and long duration and achieving <100 mg/dL LDL-C levels) can significantly decrease PV in patients with SAP or ACS. These data suggested that statins can be used to reduce the atheroma burden for secondary prevention by appropriately selecting the statin regimen. No significant change in plaque composition was seen after statin therapy.

Simvastatin: present and future perspectives

Simvastatin is lipophilic statin with a short half-life that is primarily metabolized by CYP450 3A4. At doses of 5 - 80 mg, simvastatin lowers LDL cholesterol by 25 - 50%. Simvastatin has been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease by 35% and overall mortality by up to 30% over 5 years. The recommended starting dose of simvastatin 40 mg is approved as a lipid-lowering agent and for all high-risk patients, including those with cardiovascular disease and diabetes, regardless of the baseline LDL level. Simvastatin dose should be adjusted in those receiving CYP3A4 inhibitors, gemfibrozil, or ciclosporin, amiodarone, or in those with severe renal insufficiency. Coformulation of simvastatin with ezetimibe is now available, and coformulation with extended release niacin is under development.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of clinically relevant adverse events from HMG CoA reductase inhibitor trials worldwide from 1982 to present

PURPOSE

Our objective was to determine the association of clinically relevant adverse events from a systematic review and meta-analysis of statin randomized controlled trials (RCT).

METHODS

We performed the meta-analysis in the manner of a Cochrane Collaboration systematic review. Outcomes were discontinuances of therapy or muscle-related symptoms due to adverse events. We searched for articles from 1982 through June 2006 in MEDLINE and other databases. The main inclusion criteria were double blind, placebo controlled RCTs with a monotherapy intervention of any marketed statin and active surveillance of adverse events. We excluded studies of drug interactions, organ transplants, or exercise, or those not meeting all of the study quality criteria. The primary analysis was a statin formulation stratified fixed-effect model using Peto odds-ratios (POR). Secondary analyses explored the stability of the primary results.

RESULTS

Over 86,000 study participants from 119 studies were included. Available statins were associated with a lower POR of discontinuance (overall: 0.88 [0.84, 0.93], largest effect with pravastatin: 0.79 [0.74, 0.84]), an elevated POR of rhabdomyolysis (1.59 [0.54, 4.70]) and myositis (2.56 [1.12, 5.85]), and null odds of myalgia (1.09 [0.97, 1.23]). Cerivastatin by comparison demonstrated larger PORs for discontinuances and muscle-related adverse events. Secondary analyses demonstrated the stability of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, discontinuation of statin therapy due to adverse events was no worse than placebo. The risks of muscle-related adverse events were in general agreement with the known risks of statins.

Statin-induced myositis: a commonly encountered or rare side effect?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Statins are well established as first-line agents for cholesterol lowering in cardiovascular disease, with accumulating evidence supporting their initiation and guidelines recommending treatment to lower LDL levels. Although generally well tolerated with few side effects, including headaches and gastrointestinal symptoms, concerns are raised regarding myopathy, which may lead to fatal rhabdomyolysis. This review examines current evidence on statin interactions, mechanism of injury and toxicity.

RECENT FINDINGS

Significant myopathy is rare with an incidence of less than 0.5% of patients. Statin side effects may be dose-related, associated with other drug interactions that interfere with statin metabolic pathways through cytochrome p450 pathways or glucuronidation, or related to co-morbidities. Several theories have suggested that statin myotoxicity may be due to intracellular cholesterol depletion, or interference with oxidative phosphorylation pathways. Exact mechanisms are yet to be fully defined. Individuals with mixed dyslipidaemia may require combination therapy to achieve target lipid levels. No large-scale randomized trials have yet reported on the safety of combination therapy, although more recent studies may shed some light when they report.

CONCLUSION

As most individuals on statins are 'high-risk' patients, they tend to be on multiple agents for cardiovascular disease which may interact with their statin. Progression of myalgia or myositis to rhabdomyolysis is rare (one in 30-100,000 patient-years of exposure), but if progressive muscle symptoms are ignored then fatalities can occur. When prescribing statins, physicians should be alert to potential risks and educate patients to report any potentially significant symptoms.

Cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment

The benefits of antihypertensive treatment are influenced by both the absolute initial cardiovascular risk, and the relative reduction. Because age is a major determinant of the absolute cardiovascular risk, and because the strategies for hypertension diagnosis and treatment are not very much influenced by age, hypertension management appears to be more cost-effective after the age of 45, in both men and women. Below this age, the absolute gain in life-years seems to be smaller, and sensitivity analysis demonstrate an important influence on the results of assumptions about the effects of treatment on quality of life and the discounting rate.

Mega-trials and management of acute myocardial infarction

Clinical management of acute myocardial infarction has been strongly influenced by large, simple trials (mega-trials) with unrestrictive protocols and limited data collection. The design has been adopted to increase statistical power to a maximum. Its validity rests on an effective randomisation procedure and intention-to-treat analysis of deaths. Experience has shown that mega-trials tend to generate effect-estimates nearer the null than those from conventional trials or meta-analyses. When a small or absent observed treatment effect (or subgroup effect) in a mega-trial contrasts with the results of conventionally designed trials, it is necessary to assess both null bias and failure to increase the true treatment effect to a maximum in the mega-trial. Null bias will arise when the contrast between treatment and no-treatment, or between subgroups, is blunted either by non-protocol therapy or by inaccuracy of data, including misclassification between subgroups. Each is more likely with an unrestrictive design. To increase the true treatment effect to a maximum, trial conditions must be specified with insight into mechanism, dose-dependence, and time-dependence. The mega-trial design is therefore unsuited to an exploratory role. These issues are illustrated by the examples of nitrates, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, and magnesium in acute myocardial infarction but have general relevance to the validity and generalisability of simple trials.

The effect of the angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor zofenopril on mortality and morbidity after anterior myocardial infarction. The Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-Term Evaluation (SMILE) Study Investigators

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular dilatation and neuroendocrine activation are common after acute anterior myocardial infarction. Long-term treatment with an angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitor may improve outcome by attenuating these processes. We investigated whether the ACE inhibitor zofenopril, administered for six weeks after anterior myocardial infarction, could improve both short-term and long-term outcome.

METHODS

A total of 1556 patients were enrolled within 24 hours after the onset of symptoms of acute anterior myocardial infarction, and they were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to receive either placebo (784 patients) or zofenopril (772 patients) for six weeks. At this time we assessed the incidence of death or severe congestive heart failure. The patients were reexamined after one year to assess survival.

RESULTS

The incidence of death or severe congestive heart failure at six weeks was significantly reduced in the zofenopril group (55 patients, 7.1 percent), as compared with the placebo group (83 patients, 10.6 percent); the cumulative reduction in the risk of death or severe congestive heart failure was 34 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 8 to 54 percent; P = 0.018). The reduction in risk was 46 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 11 to 71 percent; P = 0.018) for severe congestive heart failure and 25 percent (95 percent confidence interval, -11 to 60 percent; P = 0.19) for death. After one year of observation, the mortality rate was significantly lower in the zofenopril group (10.0 percent) than in the placebo group (14.1 percent); the reduction in risk was 29 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 6 to 51 percent; P = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with zofenopril significantly improved both short-term and long-term outcome when this drug was started within 24 hours after the onset of acute anterior myocardial infarction and continued for six weeks.