Rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin treatment in adults with coronary artery disease: secondary analysis of the randomised LODESTAR trial

Different diabetogenic effect of statins according to intensity and dose in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a nationwide cohort study

Statin is crucial for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients. However, the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) associated with statin is a concern. This study aimed to determine the incremental diabetogenic effects of statins according to their intensity and dose in AMI patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Among 13,104 patients enrolled in the Korea AMI Registry between 2011 and 2015, 6152 patients without diabetes mellitus (DM) who underwent PCI and received moderate-to-high-intensity atorvastatin and rosuvastatin were selected for the study. The endpoints were NODM and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), composite of all-cause mortality, recurrent MI, and revascularization up to 3 years. Among the participants, 3747 and 2405 received moderate- and high-intensity statins, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated a higher incidence of NODM in patients with high-intensity statins than those with moderate-intensity. High-intensity statin was a significant predictor of NODM after adjusting for other co-variables (HR = 1.316, 95% CI 1.024-1.692; P < 0.032). Higher dose of rosuvastatin was associated with a higher cumulative incidence of NODM, but this dose-dependency was not apparent with atorvastatin. Cumulative incidence of MACE decreased dose-dependently only with atorvastatin. High-intensity statin was associated with a higher cumulative incidence of NODM in AMI patients, and this association was more evident in rosuvastatin. The different diabetogenic effects of the two statins provide supporting evidence for understanding the nuanced nature of statin treatment in relation to NODM.

Effect of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus in patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease: a post-hoc analysis from the LODESTAR randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The impact of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) among patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease (CAD) remains to be clarified. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of NODM in patients with CAD treated with rosuvastatin compared to atorvastatin in the randomized LODESTAR trial.

METHODS

In the LODESTAR trial, patients with CAD were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin or atorvastatin using a 2-by-2 factorial randomization. In this post-hoc analysis, the 3-year incidence of NODM was compared between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin treatment in the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy as the principal population of interest.

RESULTS

Among 2932 patients without diabetes mellitus at baseline, 2377 were included in the as-treated population analysis. In the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between the rosuvastatin and atorvastatin groups (11.4% [106/948] versus 8.8% [73/856], hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98 to 1.77, P = 0.071). When the risk of NODM with rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin was assessed according to the achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level, the risk of NODM began to increase at a LDL-C level below 70 mg/dL. The incidence of NODM was significantly greater in the rosuvastatin group than it was in the atorvastatin group when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL (13.9% versus 8.0%; HR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.73, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Among CAD patients receiving high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. However, a drug effect of the statin type on NODM was observed when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02579499.

Understanding the impact of ABCG2 polymorphisms on drug pharmacokinetics: focus on rosuvastatin and allopurinol

INTRODUCTION

In addition to the well-established understanding of the pharmacogenetics of drug-metabolizing enzymes, there is growing data on the effects of genetic variation in drug transporters, particularly ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters. However, the evidence that these genetic variants can be used to predict drug effects and to adjust individual dosing to avoid adverse events is still limited.

AREAS COVERED

This review presents a summary of the current literature from the PubMed database as of February 2024 regarding the impact of genetic variants on ABCG2 function and their relevance to the clinical use of the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor rosuvastatin and the xanthine oxidase inhibitor allopurinol.

EXPERT OPINION

Although there are pharmacogenetic guidelines for the ABCG2 missense variant Q141K, there is still some conflicting data regarding the clinical benefits of these recommendations. Some caution appears to be warranted in homozygous ABCG2 Q141K carriers when rosuvastatin is administered at higher doses and such information is already included in the drug label. The benefit of dose adaption to lower possible side effects needs to be evaluated in prospective clinical studies.

New pharmacological agents and novel cardiovascular pharmacotherapy strategies in 2023

Although cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of death worldwide, their pharmacotherapy remains suboptimal. Thus, there is a clear unmet need to develop more effective and safer pharmacological strategies. In this review, we summarize the most relevant advances in cardiovascular pharmacology in 2023, including the approval of first-in-class drugs that open new avenues for the treatment of atherosclerotic CVD and heart failure (HF). The new indications of drugs already marketed (repurposing) for the treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, hypercholesterolaemia, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and HF; the impact of polypharmacy on guideline-directed drug use is highlighted as well as results from negative clinical trials. Finally, we end with a summary of the most important phase 2 and 3 clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of cardiovascular drugs under development for the prevention and treatment of CVDs.

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.

Novel and Emerging LDL-C Lowering Strategies: A New Era of Dyslipidemia Management

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) represents a major global health challenge, significantly contributing to mortality rates. This chronic inflammatory condition affecting blood vessels is intricately linked to hypercholesterolemia, with elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recognized as a central and modifiable risk factor. The effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) in mitigating ASCVD risk is well established, with studies revealing a substantial reduction in major ischemic events correlating with LDL-C reduction. While statins, often combined with ezetimibe, remain fundamental in dyslipidemia management, a significant proportion of patients on statin therapy continue to experience cardiovascular events. Recent pharmacological advancements, driven by a deeper understanding of atherogenesis, have unveiled novel therapeutic targets and potent drugs. Notably, agents like bempedoic acid and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors (evolocumab, alirocumab, inclisiran) have emerged as effective options to intensify LLT and achieve LDL-C goals, addressing limitations associated with statins, such as myopathy. Molecular insights into alternative pathways have spurred the investigation of emerging agents, offering promising perspectives for novel medications with efficacy comparable to established treatments, associated with advantages in cost and administration. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the evolving landscape of lipid-lowering strategies, highlighting the progress made in addressing ASCVD risk and the potential of upcoming therapies to further optimize cardiovascular prevention.

Statins-From Fungi to Pharmacy

Statins have been used in the treatment of hyperlipidemia, both as monotherapy and in combination therapy. Natural fermentation processes of fungi such as Monascus spp., Penicillium spp., Aspergillus terreus, and Pleurotus ostreatus have given rise to natural statins. Compactin (mevastatin), the original naturally occurring statin, is the primary biotransformation substrate in the manufacturing process of marketed drugs. Statins are classified into natural, semi-synthetic derivatives of natural statins, and synthetic ones. Synthetic statins differ from natural statins in their structural composition, with the only common feature being the HMG-CoA-like moiety responsible for suppressing HMG-CoA reductase. Statins do not differ significantly regarding their pleiotropic and adverse effects, but their characteristics depend on their pharmacokinetic parameters and chemical properties. This paper focuses on describing the processes of obtaining natural statins, detailing the pharmacokinetics of available statins, divided into natural and synthetic, and indicating their pleiotropic effects.

Comparison of the Efficacy of Atorvastatin with Rosuvastatin in Preventing Cardiovascular Events Among Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: A Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study was to assess and compare the efficacy of atorvastatin with rosuvastatin in preventing cardiovascular events among patients already diagnosed with cardiovascular disease (CVD). We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Two investigators independently searched online databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the Excerpta Medica database (Embase), from the inception of databases until November 2023. The primary outcome assessed in the meta-analysis included cardiovascular mortality and a composite of cardiovascular events. Other outcomes included myocardial infarction and stroke. A total of four studies were selected for our meta-analysis. A total of 7,378 patients were enrolled, including 3,721 in the atorvastatin group and 3,657 in the rosuvastatin group. Pooled analysis showed that the incidence of composite cardiovascular events was not significantly different in patients receiving atorvastatin and patients receiving rosuvastatin (risk ratio (RR): 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79 to 1.09, p-value: 0.38, I-square: 0%). Pooled analysis showed that the risk of cardiovascular mortality was not significantly different between the two study groups (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.81, p-value: 0.93, I-square: 0%). In conclusion, our meta-analysis, based on four selected studies, found no significant disparities in composite cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke between patients administered atorvastatin and those receiving rosuvastatin. This outcome underscores the comparable efficacy of these statins in mitigating cardiovascular risks, highlighting their clinical equipoise in the realm of secondary prevention.