Effect of fluvastatin on lipoprotein profiles in treating renal transplant recipients with dyslipoproteinemia

Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Dyslipidemia represents an important risk factor for cardiovascular diseases, although its optimal management after kidney transplantation remains unclear. The present meta-analysis aimed to shed light on the efficacy and safety of statins among kidney transplant recipients, evaluating their potential effects on the risk of cardiovascular events, mortality and graft survival.

METHODS

Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, CENTRAL, Clinicaltrials.gov and Google Scholar were systematically searched from their inception through April 20, 2024. Both randomized controlled trials and observational studies evaluating the effects of statin administration after kidney transplantation were held eligible. Random-effects models were fitted using the maximum likelihood method, while the certainty of evidence was appraised following the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) approach.

RESULTS

Overall, 27 studies (10 randomized controlled trials and 17 observational studies) were included. Statin use compared to no use was associated with a lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events [Relative risk (RR): 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-0.96, moderate certainty] and overall mortality (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.74-0.94, low certainty). The risk of graft loss did not differ between the compared groups (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.48-1.08, very low certainty). Regarding safety endpoints, statin use was associated with a lower risk of hepatotoxicity (RR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.70-0.93, moderate certainty), but with a greater risk of rhabdomyolysis (RR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.10-1.70, low certainty) and cataract (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14-1.31, moderate certainty). No statistically significant differences between the compared groups with and without statin use were observed concerning the risk of creatine kinase elevation, post-transplant diabetes mellitus, hip fracture, venous thromboembolism, or cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Among kidney transplant recipients, statin use is associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events and better patient survival, presenting an acceptable safety profile. Further large-scale studies are needed to determine the optimal statin dosing strategy and lipid-lowering goals, depending on comorbidities and immunosuppression regimens.

REGISTRATION

https://doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.5qpvok3yzl4o/v1 .

Effect of Low Molecular Weight Heparin on Bone Metabolism and Hyperlipidemia in Patients on Maintenance Hemodialysis

The effect of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on serum lipid profile in hemodialysis remains controversial and its effect on bone metabolism has not been studied. A crossover study was conducted in 40 patients on stable hemodialysis using unfractionated heparin (UFH) for more than 24 months. These patients were then treated with a LMWH (nadroparin-Ca) for 8 months during hemodialysis and subsequently switched back to UFH for 12 months. Serum lipid profile, biochemical markers for bone metabolism, and bone densitometry (BMD) were monitored at four-month intervals while all medications remained unchanged.

Cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C), lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)), apolipoprotein B (Apo B) were raised in 35%, 29%, 12%, 24% and 24% of patients respectively. High-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein A1 (Apo A-1) were reduced in 47% and 9% of patients. Bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BALP) and intact osteocalcin (OSC), both reflecting osteoblastic activity, were raised in 65% and 94% of patients. Tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRACP) reflecting osteoclastic activity and parathyroid hormone (PTH) were elevated in 35% and 88% of patients. Following LMWH treatment, TC, Tg, Lp(a) and Apo B were reduced by 7%, 30%, 21% and 10% respectively (p<0.05 or <0.01) while Apo A-1 were raised by 7% (p<0.01). Simultaneously, TRACP was reduced by 13% (p<0.05). These biochemical changes were detected soon after 4 months of LMWH administration. Although BMD values in our patients were lower than those of age-matched normal subjects, significant changes were not observed with LMWH treatment. After switching back to UFH for hemodialysis, these biochemical indices reverted to previous values during UFH treatment with a significant higher level in TC and Apo B while serum Apo A-1 remained elevated. Our study suggests LMWH may partially alleviate hyperlipidemia and, perhaps, osteoporosis associated with UFH administration in patients on maintenance hemodialysis.

Fluvastatin for lowering lipids

BACKGROUND

Fluvastatin is thought to be the least potent statin on the market, however, the dose-related magnitude of effect of fluvastatin on blood lipids is not known.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objectiveTo quantify the effects of various doses of fluvastatin on blood total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL cholesterol), high-density lipoprotein (HDL cholesterol), and triglycerides in participants with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease.Secondary objectivesTo quantify the variability of the effect of various doses of fluvastatin.To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in randomised placebo-controlled trials.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to February 2017: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2017, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1946 to February Week 2 2017), MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, Embase (1974 to February Week 2 2017), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, CDSR, DARE, Epistemonikos and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised placebo-controlled and uncontrolled before and after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of fluvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks in participants of any age with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included, and extracted data. We entered data from placebo-controlled and uncontrolled before and after trials into Review Manager 5 as continuous and generic inverse variance data, respectively. WDAEs information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials. We assessed all trials using the 'Risk of bias' tool under the categories of sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other potential biases.

MAIN RESULTS

One-hundred and forty-five trials (36 placebo controlled and 109 before and after) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of fluvastatin in 18,846 participants. The participants were of any age with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease, and fluvastatin effects were studied within a treatment period of three to 12 weeks. Log dose-response data over doses of 2.5 mg to 80 mg revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol and a weak linear dose-related effect on blood triglycerides. There was no dose-related effect of fluvastatin on blood HDL cholesterol. Fluvastatin 10 mg/day to 80 mg/day reduced LDL cholesterol by 15% to 33%, total cholesterol by 11% to 25% and triglycerides by 3% to 17.5%. For every two-fold dose increase there was a 6.0% (95% CI 5.4 to 6.6) decrease in blood LDL cholesterol, a 4.2% (95% CI 3.7 to 4.8) decrease in blood total cholesterol and a 4.2% (95% CI 2.0 to 6.3) decrease in blood triglycerides. The quality of evidence for these effects was judged to be high. When compared to atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, fluvastatin was about 12-fold less potent than atorvastatin and 46-fold less potent than rosuvastatin at reducing LDL cholesterol. Very low quality of evidence showed no difference in WDAEs between fluvastatin and placebo in 16 of 36 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 1.52 (95% CI 0.94 to 2.45).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Fluvastatin lowers blood total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglyceride in a dose-dependent linear fashion. Based on the effect on LDL cholesterol, fluvastatin is 12-fold less potent than atorvastatin and 46-fold less potent than rosuvastatin. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with fluvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 56% of the placebo-controlled trials.

Fluvastatin in the treatment of dyslipidemia associated with chronic kidney failure and renal transplantation

Premature atherosclerotic coronary heart disease driven by multiple risk factors is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among the 6 million patients in the United States with chronic renal failure. Consensus is that kidney failure and renal transplantation patients should be treated aggressively for dyslipidemia. Major medical literature databases were searched for published information about fluvastatin, a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, used in patients with impaired renal function. This article characterizes the dyslipidemia observed in these clinical settings and reviews the clinical experience with fluvastatin.

Statins' dosage in patients with renal failure and cyclosporine drug-drug interactions in transplant recipient patients

Dyslipidemia is frequent in patients with renal failure and in transplant recipient patients. This lead to a wide use of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins) in patients with impaired renal function or in patients treated with cyclosporine as post-transplantation immunosuppressive therapy. As a result, it is crucial for those patients' physicians to be aware of how to handle these drugs when renal function is impaired and/or when cyclosporine is co-administered. Most statins have an extensive hepatic elimination and the renal route is usually a minor elimination pathway. However, pharmacokinetic alterations have been described for some of these drugs in patients with renal insufficiency. Cyclosporine is a widely used immunosuppresive therapy in solid organ transplant patients and drug-drug interactions are likely to occur when statins and cyclosporine are administered together. Those interactions may theoretically result in increased statins and/or cyclosporine serum levels with potential muscle and/or renal toxicity. As a result, caution is warranted if concurrent administration is performed. In this review, we synthesized the data from the literature on (1) the pharmacokinetics and dosage adjustment of atorvastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin in patients with renal failure and (2) the potential drug-drug interactions between these drugs and cyclosporine in transplant recipient patients.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic drug interactions with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors

The HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are effective in both the primary and secondary prevention of ischaemic heart disease. As a group, these drugs are well tolerated apart from two uncommon but potentially serious adverse effects: elevation of liver enzymes and skeletal muscle abnormalities, which range from benign myalgias to life-threatening rhabdomyolysis. Adverse effects with statins are frequently associated with drug interactions because of their long-term use in older patients who are likely to be exposed to polypharmacy. The recent withdrawal of cerivastatin as a result of deaths from rhabdomyolysis illustrates the clinical importance of such interactions. Drug interactions involving the statins may have either a pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic basis, or both. As these drugs are highly extracted by the liver, displacement interactions are of limited importance. The cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme system plays an important part in the metabolism of the statins, leading to clinically relevant interactions with other agents, particularly cyclosporin, erythromycin, itraconazole, ketoconazole and HIV protease inhibitors, that are also metabolised by this enzyme system. An additional complicating feature is that individual statins are metabolised to differing degrees, in some cases producing active metabolites. The CYP3A family metabolises lovastatin, simvastatin, atorvastatin and cerivastatin, whereas CYP2C9 metabolises fluvastatin. Cerivastatin is also metabolised by CYP2C8. Pravastatin is not significantly metabolised by the CYP system. In addition, the statins are substrates for P-glycoprotein, a drug transporter present in the small intestine that may influence their oral bioavailability. In clinical practice, the risk of a serious interaction causing myopathy is enhanced when statin metabolism is markedly inhibited. Thus, rhabdomyolysis has occurred following the coadministration of cyclosporin, a potent CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein inhibitor, and lovastatin. Itraconazole has been shown to increase exposure to simvastatin and its active metabolite by at least 10-fold. Pharmacodynamically, there is an increased risk of myopathy when statins are coprescribed with fibrates or nicotinic acid. This occurs relatively infrequently, but is particularly associated with the combination of cerivastatin and gemfibrozil. Statins may also alter the concentrations of other drugs, such as warfarin or digoxin, leading to alterations in effect or a requirement for clinical monitoring. Knowledge of the pharmacokinetic properties of the statins should allow the avoidance of the majority of drug interactions. If concurrent therapy with known inhibitors of statin metabolism is necessary, the patient should be monitored for signs and symptoms of myopathy or rhabdomyolysis and the statin should be discontinued if necessary.

The effect of fluvastatin of hyperlipidemia in renal transplant recipients: a prospective, placebo-controlled study

Posttransplant hyperlipidemia is a common complication which may affect long term cardiovascular mortality. In this prospective, placebo-controlled study, 19 renal transplant recipients (11 male 8 female, mean age 31.2 +/- 8.4 years) with good allograft function (serum creatinine <2 mg/dl) more than 6 months after transplantation were included. All the patients had hyperlipidemia (serum cholesterol >230 mg/dl and/or LDL-cholesterol >130 mg/dl) despite dietary interventions. The patients were treated with a triple immunosuppressive regimen. After a 8-week period of placebo plus diet regimen, the patients were put on fluvastatin plus diet for another 8 weeks. The patients were followed for its effect on lipid parameters and side effects. After convertion to fluvastatin, serum cholesterol (263.0 +/- 31.6 vs 223.2 +/- 31.6 mg/dl, p = 0.001), LDL-cholesterol (174.4 +/- 28.3 vs 136.4 +/- 28.5 mg/dl, p = 0.002), Apolipoprotein (Apo) A1 (131.1 +/- 16.9 vs 114.7 +/- 18.4 mg/dl, p = 0.001) and Apo B (109.0 +/- 29.8 vs 97.3 +/- 31.5 mg/dl, p = 0.02) levels decreased significantly. Serum levels of triglycerides, VLDL-cholesterol and HDL-cholesterol levels did not vary under fluvastatin. Serum lipoprotein (a) levels were also unchanged during the whole study period (24.9 +/- 19.4 vs 23.1 +/- 19.8 mg/dl, p > 0.05). We concluded that fluvastatin effectively decreased atherogenic lipoproteins such as serum cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, Apo B in posttransplant hyperlipidemia, however fluvastatin had no effect on another independent risk factor of atherogenesis, serum lipoprotein (a) levels.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of fluvastatin in heart transplant recipients taking cyclosporine A

During the last decades, transplantation has become an established tool for the treatment of terminal organ failure. Beside immunological factors, hyperlipidemia is the main problem after heart transplantation, causing rapid transplant coronary artery disease (TxCAD) and poor long-term prognosis at the beginning of the transplantation. Heart transplant recipients are now effectively treated with lipid lowering substances, of which HMG-CoA-reductase inhibitors are the most potent. However, treatment with these substances correlates with an increased risk for the development of rhabdomyolysis due to therapy with the immunosuppressive cyclosporine A. Our study monitored the safety and efficacy of treatment with the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor fluvastatin in heart transplant recipients compared to healthy controls. We investigated 10 patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy consisting of cyclosporine A, prednisone, and azathioprine who had increased concentrations of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C), and 10 age-matched healthy controls. The patients were treated with 40 mg/day fluvastatin for 4 weeks and 20 mg/day for 4 additional weeks. Control individuals received 40 mg/day fluvastatin for 4 weeks only. Parameters of fluvastatin pharmacokinetics (maximum concentration of the drug (C(max.)), time (t(max.)) to reach C(max.), area under the concentration vs. time curve (AUC(0h-24h)), elimination half-life time (t(1/2))), apparent total body clearance (CL), blood cyclosporine A concentration, plasma lipids, and safety parameters were determined in both study groups at the beginning of the study and after 4 weeks. The latter were determined in the patient group also after 8 and 12 weeks. Treatment with 40 mg/day fluvastatin caused a significant decrease in total cholesterol (patients: 5.47 +/- 1.32 mmol/L vs. 7.30 +/- 1.83 mmol/L; controls: 4.69 +/- 0.64 mmol/L vs. 5.81 +/- 0.72 mmol/L), LDL-C (patients: 3.28 +/- 1.25 mmol/L vs. 5.00 +/- 1.85 mmol/L; controls: 2.58 +/- 0.63 mmol/L vs. 3.50 +/- 0.70 mmol/L), and triglycerides (patients: 1.99 +/- 0.77 mmol/L vs. 2.50 +/- 1.00 mmol/L; controls: 1.24 +/- 0.46 mmol/L vs. 1.72 +/- 0.67 mmol/L) in both study groups, whereas HDL-C was not significantly changed (patients: 1.29 +/- 0.35 mmol/L vs. 1.17 +/- 0.32 mmol/L; controls: 1.55 +/- 0.30 mmol/L vs. 1.53 +/- 0.26 mmol/L). Values of C(max.) and AUC(0h-24h) were higher in the patient group than in the control group (day 1, patients vs. controls, C(max.): 869.4 +/- 604.0 ng/mL vs. 211.9 +/- 113.9 ng/mL; AUC(0h-24h): 1948.8 +/- 1347.9 ng/mL*h vs. 549.4 +/- 247.4 ng/mL*h), whereas the corresponding value of CL was lower in the patient group (33.3 +/- 24.5 L/h vs. 107.9 +/- 95.8 L/h), and the values of t(max.) and t(1/2) showed no differences. In addition, values of C(max.) and AUC(0h-24h) after administration of 40 mg/day fluvastatin for 4 weeks in both groups were slightly higher than at the beginning, whereas the value of CL was slightly lower (day 28, patients vs. controls, C(max.): 1530.4 +/- 960.4 ng/mL vs. 254.7 +/- 199.8 ng/mL; AUC(0h-24h): 2615.3 +/- 1379.4 ng/mL*h vs. 841.8 +/- 421.4 ng/mL*h; CL: day 28, 21.4 +/- 15.3 L/h vs. 61.5 +/- 36.6 L/h). Except for an intermittent increase of creatine kinase, safety parameters showed no increases within the observation period. Our data suggest that fluvastatin effectively lowers plasma concentrations of cholesterol and LDL-C in patients after heart transplantation, however, the metabolism of fluvastatin is affected by concomitant therapy with cyclosporine A. Serum concentrations of fluvastatin should be monitored in cases of concomitant therapy with other substances interfering in the metabolism by competing cytochrome enzymes.

Effect of fluvastatin on endothelium-dependent brachial artery vasodilation in patients after renal transplantation

BACKGROUND

Hypercholesterolemia may affect both endothelial function and arterial distensibility (DC). Renal transplant recipients (NTX) exhibit advanced structural and functional alterations of arterial vessel walls. The aim of this double-blind, randomized trial was to evaluate the effects of fluvastatin (FLU) on brachial artery flow-mediated vasodilation (FMD) and DC in hypercholesterolemic NTX.

METHODS

Eighteen NTX received FLU 40 mg/day and 18 NTX placebo (PLA). Before and after six months of treatment, the brachial artery diameter and DC at rest were measured by a Doppler frequency analysis in the M mode, and then changes in diameter during reactive hyperemia (to assess endothelial-dependent FMD) and after 400 microg sublingual nitroglycerin (to assess endothelium-independent vasodilation-NMD).

RESULTS

FLU, but not PLA, treatment resulted in significant decreases in total (from 288 +/- 10 to 239 +/- 8 mg/dL, P < 0.05) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (from 182 +/- 779 to 138 +/- 8 mg/dL, P < 0.05). Blood pressure did not differ between FLU- and PLA-treated patients and was not affected by either treatment. Also, the brachial artery baseline diameter was not different between groups and was not affected by FLU or PLA. Brachial artery flow at rest and during reactive hyperemia as measured by pulsed Doppler did not differ between groups. Brachial artery FMD increased with FLU from 0.23 +/- 0.08 to 0.54 +/- 0.08 mm (P < 0.05), whereas PLA did not alter FMD (0.22 +/- 0.07 vs. 0.14 +/- 0.05 mm at baseline and after six months of PLA treatment, respectively, P = NS). In contrast, NMD did not change significantly with either treatment (0.76 +/- 0.13 vs. 0.83 +/- 0.15 mm at baseline and after 6 months of FLU treatment, respectively, P = NS, and 0.64 +/- 0.09 vs. 0.66 +/- 0.10 mm at baseline and after 6 months of PLA treatment, respectively, P = NS). Also, brachial artery DC was not altered by FLU (6.4 +/- 1.0 vs. 5.8 +/- 0.6 x 10-3/kPa, P = NS) or PLA treatment (5.8 +/- 0.6 vs. 6.8 +/- 0.8 x 10-3/kPa, P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

In hypercholesterolemic NTX, the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor FLU significantly improves brachial artery FMD as a measure of endothelial function after six months of treatment. In contrast, FLU does not have a beneficial effect on brachial artery DC.

The metabolic effects of cyclosporin and tacrolimus

The introduction of cyclosporin and, more recently, tacrolimus in the immunosuppression of transplanted patients has lead to prolonged graft survival and increased patients' life expectancy. It has been therefore possible to evaluate the effects of long-term treatment with these drugs and metabolic alterations in patients on cyclosporin or tacrolimus have been reported by several authors. In particular, the use of these drugs is associated with abnormalities of glucose and lipid metabolism. Post-transplant diabetes is more common with tacrolimus, probably due to more marked effects on the pancreatic beta-cells, whereas increased levels of cholesterol and triglycerides are more frequently associated with cyclosporin treatment, even though, in this latter case, steroid treatment seems to play a major role. Comparison and intervention studies must be planned to evaluate the best therapeutical approaches to control these abnormalities and to assess the possibility to further increase graft and patient survival by appropriate treatment of diabetes and hyperlipidemia.

Fluvastatin in combination with cyclosporin in renal transplant recipients: a review of clinical and safety experience

Cardiovascular disease remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients who have undergone renal transplantation, with one of the main risk factors being post-transplantation hyperlipidaemia. To date, however, optimal management of elevated lipid levels in such patients has been hindered by the lack of both effective and safe treatments, coupled with concerns over probable interactions with immunosuppressive therapy, particularly cyclosporin. Numerous studies confirm that the 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG CoA) reductase inhibitors, such as fluvastatin, are effective lipid-lowering agents in renal transplant recipients, supporting findings in other patients' groups. Moreover, based on investigations of metabolic profile and clinical observation, fluvastatin (at dosages of up to 80 mg/day) is well tolerated in renal transplant recipients receiving cyclosporin. In clinical trials to date, no instances of rhabdomyolysis have been observed during co-administration of fluvastatin and cyclosporin. The potential of fluvastatin for improving survival in renal transplant recipients, in terms of both cardiovascular mortality and graft rejection, is currently being investigated in two ongoing studies: ALERT (Assessment of Lescol [fluvastatin] in Renal Transplantation) and SOLAR (Study of Lescol [fluvastatin] in Acute Rejection). The results of these landmark studies should confirm the safe utility of fluvastatin in the renal transplantation setting.

Efficacy and muscle safety of fluvastatin in cyclosporine-treated cardiac and renal transplant recipients: an exercise provocation test

BACKGROUND

Dyslipidemia is found in the majority of renal and cardiac transplant recipients. Although 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors significantly lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, such treatment has been associated with muscle toxicity, especially when used in combination with cyclosporine (CsA). We investigated the efficacy and muscle safety of fluvastatin, a new 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor, in CsA-treated transplant recipients.

METHODS

The efficacy was determined by measuring the lipid profile before and after 8 weeks of fluvastatin therapy. As parameter for possible muscle damage, the rise in serum levels of the muscle proteins creatine kinase and myoglobin was measured after an exercise provocation test (30 min on a bicycle ergometer at 60% of their maximal work load) before and during fluvastatin therapy. Nineteen CsA-treated renal and cardiac transplant recipients with hypercholesterolemia were selected.

RESULTS

After 8 weeks of treatment with a dose of fluvastatin necessary to reduce LDL-C below 3.5 mmol/L (20 mg for 3 and 40 mg for 16 patients), total cholesterol was lowered by 20% and LDL-C by 30%, and HDL2-C was increased by 35% (all P<0.01). The rise in creatine kinase after exercise before and during fluvastatin therapy was, respectively, 40% and 51%, and the rise in myoglobin was 64% and 50%. These rises were not significantly different. Hence, there was no indication for subclinical muscle pathology by fluvastatin use. Fluvastatin was well tolerated, and no adverse effects on liver or kidney function were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluvastatin can effectively lower LDL-C in CsA-treated renal and cardiac transplant recipients, without demonstrable adverse effects.

Metabolism and drug interactions of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors in transplant patients: are the statins mechanistically similar?

3-Hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (EC 1.1.1.88) inhibitors are the most effective drugs to lower cholesterol in transplant patients. However, immunosuppressants and several other drugs used after organ transplantation are cytochrome P4503A (CYP3A, EC 1.14.14.1) substrates. Pharmacokinetic interaction with some of the 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors, specifically lovastatin and simvastatin, leads to an increased incidence of muscle skeletal toxicity in transplant patients. It is our objective to review the role of drug metabolism and drug interactions of lovastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin, fluvastatin, atorvastatin, and cerivastatin. In the treatment of transplant patients, from a drug interaction perspective, pravastatin, which is not significantly metabolized by CYP enzymes, and fluvastatin, presumably a CYP2C9 substrate, compare favorably with the other statins for which the major metabolic pathways are catalyzed by CYP3A.

Post-transplant hyperlipidaemia

The correction of post-transplant hyperlipidaemia warrants the judicious and timely use of pharmacological agents with dietary modification and exercise. Reduction in hyperlipidaemia may have some role in decreasing the incidence of chronic rejection of allografts. The awareness that the morbidity and mortality of atherosclerotic disease may be lowered by active intervention will result in a better quality of life for transplant recipients.

Hyperlipidemia after liver transplantation: natural history and treatment with the hydroxy-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitor pravastatin

This study was designed to determine the frequency of hyperlipidemia after orthotopic liver transplantation and whether treatment with a hydroxy-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor was safe and efficacious. Cholesterol levels were assessed in 45 consecutive adult liver transplants (mean +/- SE). Four of 22 patients on cyclosporine (CsA) (18%) and three of 23 patients on FK506 (13%) had levels >225 mg/dl at 12 months (cholesterol levels for patients on CsA [total n=22]: pre-Tx = 140+/-11, 1 month = 183+/-36,3 months = 221+/-12, 6 months = 211+/-11, 12 months = 202+/-14 [P<0.01 vs. pre-Tx]; FK506 [total n=23]: Pre-Tx = 151+/-13, 1 month = 187+/-22, 3 months = 188+/-10, 6 months = 184+/-13, 12 months = 164+/-9 [P=0.02 vs. CsA]). A separate cohort of patients with stable graft function, cholesterol >225 mg/dl, and two additional risk factors for coronary artery disease were started on pravastatin. Ninety-eight patients were enrolled. Sixteen patients (16%) discontinued the drug because of subjective complaints. No episodes of rhabdomyolysis or hepatotoxicity occurred (cholesterol levels for patients on CsA [total n=65]: pretreatment = 251+/-7, 6 months = 220+/-7 [P=0.01 vs. pretreatment], 12 months = 224+/-8 [P=0.01 vs. pretreatment]; FK506 [total n=17]: pretreatment = 251+/-17, 6 months = 219+/-17, 12 months = 208+/-17 [P=0.08 vs. pretreatment]). Natural killer cells isolated from normal volunteers (n=14) exhibited 27+/-9% specific lysis. Patients on FK506 or cyclosporine-based immunosuppression alone (n=11) exhibited 20+/-4% specific lysis. Standard immunosuppression plus pravastatin (n=10) decreased lysis to 0.2+/-10% (P<0.02 vs. controls and standard immunosuppression). We conclude: (1) posttransplant hyperlipidemia occurs less frequently in liver transplant patients than in renal or cardiac transplants; (2) pravastatin is safe and efficacious for cholesterol reduction in liver transplant patients; and (3) pravastatin coadministered with standard immunosuppression reduces natural killer cell-specific lysis in these recipients.