Effects of atorvastatin on bone in postmenopausal women with dyslipidemia: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial

LDL-cholesterol lowering agents (statins and PCSK9 inhibitors) and the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Statin therapy reduces the risk of ischemic stroke; however, certain studies have observed an increased incidence of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). Moreover, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9(PCSK-9) inhibitors have emerged as a powerful class of lipid-lowering medications, potentially with a lower propensity for causing hemorrhagic events. To investigate this matter further, we conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving statins and PCSK-9 inhibitors that reported occurrences of ICH.

METHODS

We performed a literature search of Medline, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library from database inception until August 2023. All randomized controlled trials of statin therapy and PCSK-9 inhibitors that reported ICH or hemorrhagic stroke were included. The primary outcome variable was ICH. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed by using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We performed network meta-analysis to compare and rank statin and PCSK-9 inhibitors therapies. This study is registered (2023110026. inplasy.com).

RESULTS

A total of 26251 citations were identified by the search, and 38 potentially eligible articles were included. In total, data from 271411 individuals were analyzed. The data showed that there was not a significant increased risk of intracerebral hemorrhage for all statins and PCSK-9 inhibitors compared with placebo. atorvastatin and rosuvastatin were associated with a lower risk of death than placebo (ORs ranging between 0.79 and 0.82). For risk of intracerebral hemorrhage and mortality. there was not a significant increased risk among all drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

LDL-Cholesterol lowering agents (statins and PCSK-9 inhibitors) was not associated with a significant increased risk of ICH. Our network meta-analysis provides strong evidence for the safety of statins and PCSK-9 inhibitors, but more studies are needed to further validate this conclusion.

CTX-1 and TRACP-5b as biomarkers for osteoporosis risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study

Objective

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) demonstrates a higher risk of fractures compared to the healthy population. Therefore, the aim of our study is to assess the risk of osteoporosis in T2DM patients.

Methodology

A cross-sectional observational study was conducted in T2DM patients. The serum levels of bone resorption markers- carboxy-terminal crosslinked telopeptide of type 1 collagen (CTX-1) and tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b (TRACP-5b) were compared in the T2DM group (n = 43) and the control group (n = 43) and its association with duration of T2DM, HbA1c level, body mass index (BMI), oral hypoglycaemic agents (OHA), and level of functioning was evaluated.

Results

CTX-1 and TRACP-5b were significantly lower in the T2DM group compared to the control group (p < 0.05). There was no significant correlation between the bone resorption markers and the duration of T2DM and HbA1c levels. However, a significant positive correlation was found between the level of functioning and TRACP-5b level, but no such correlation was observed in T2DM patients. The linear regression model revealed that none of the OHA affected the levels of CTX-1 and TRACP-5b.

Conclusion

The bone resorption markers are not influenced by the duration of T2DM and HbA1c level. However, they were significantly associated with BMI and the level of functionality. However, further research is needed to strengthen the evidence of the association between T2DM and osteoporosis.

The Effect of Statin Therapy on Bone Metabolism Markers and Mineral Density: Aa GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Purpose

Statin therapy is widely used for the management of dyslipidemia and the prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). However, there is a growing concern about its potential effects on bone metabolism markers and mineral density. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of statin therapy on these parameters.

Methods

PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Clarivate Analytics Web of Science databases were searched from inception to August 2023, using MESH terms and keywords.

Results

After screening 2450 articles, 16 studies that met the inclusion criteria were included, of which 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were used for meta-analysis. The findings showed that statin therapy significantly reduced bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (B-ALP) levels (WMD=-1.1 U/L; 95% CI -2.2 to -0.07; P=0.03; I2=0%,), and bone mineral density (BMD) at different sites (WMD=-0.06 g/cm2; 95% CI -0.08 to -0.04; P<0.001; I2=97.7%, P<0.001). However, this treatment did not have a significant effect on osteocalcin, serum C-terminal peptide of type I collagen (S-CTx), serum N-telopeptides of type I collagen (NTx) concentration, or overall fracture risk.

Conclusion

This systematic review and meta-analysis provide evidence that statin therapy is associated with a significant reduction in B-ALP levels and BMD at different sites of the skeleton. Further studies are needed to investigate the long-term effects of statin therapy on bone health and to identify the potential underlying mechanisms.

Comparison of the pleiotropic effect of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin on postmenopausal changes in bone turnover: A randomized comparative study

BACKGROUND

Statins are the first-line treatment for dyslipidemia, which is a major modifiable risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Studies have shown that in addition to the beneficial lipid-lowering effect, statins also exhibit a number of pleiotropic effects that may find application in other diseases, including osteoporosis. This study aimed to assess the effect of statins on bone turnover, as measured by the concentration of bone turnover markers, and to compare the effect of atorvastatin as a lipophilic statin and rosuvastatin as a hydrophilic statin.

METHODS

This study included 34 postmenopausal women aged < 65 years with newly diagnosed dyslipidemia requiring statin therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a statin drug. Statins were initiated at standard doses of 5 to 10 mg of rosuvastatin and 20 mg of atorvastatin. The levels of C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen as a bone resorption marker and N-terminal propeptide of procollagen type I as a marker of bone formation, lipid concentrations and other biochemical parameters were assessed at baseline and after 6 and twelve months of treatment.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the levels of bone turnover markers before and 6 months after statin implementation (P > .05) - for all patients or subgroups according to statin use. Analysis of the results showed that after 12 months, there was a statistically significant decrease in N-terminal propeptide of procollagen type I concentration in all subjects (P = .004). By statin subgroup, a statistically significant decrease in N-terminal propeptide of procollagen type I was observed only in patients receiving rosuvastatin (P = .012) and not in those receiving atorvastatin (P = .25). Moreover, changes in bone turnover markers did not correlate with changes in lipid concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

These results may indicate the superiority of atorvastatin over rosuvastatin in inhibiting adverse changes in bone turnover in postmenopausal women. Confirmed by studies involving a larger population, the observed differences might find particular applications in clinical practice, and the choice of atorvastatin over rosuvastatin for women could be considered in the early postmenopausal period to reduce the risk of osteoporosis and subsequent osteoporotic fractures.

Differential effect of atorvastatin and pravastatin on thoracic spine attenuation: A sub-analysis of a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Statins reduce cardiovascular events and may improve bone mineral density.

METHODS

We conducted a sub-analysis of a randomized clinical trial that investigated the differential effect of moderate vs intensive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering therapies on coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores, and used the acquired images to assess the change in radiological attenuation of selected thoracic vertebrae. Baseline and 12-month unenhanced chest CT scans were performed in 420 hyperlipidemic, postmenopausal women randomized to atorvastatin (ATV) 80 mg/day or pravastatin (PRV) 40 mg/day in the Beyond Endorsed Lipid Lowering with Electron Beam Tomography Scanning (BELLES) trial. Bone attenuation was measured in three contiguous thoracic vertebrae at baseline and 12 months.

RESULTS

There were no differences in baseline demographic and clinical characteristics between treatment arms. The median percent lowering (interquartile range) in LDL-C was significantly greater with ATV than PRV [-53 (-69 to 20)% vs -28 (-55 to 74)%, p < 0.001], although the CAC score change was similar [12 (-63 to 208)% vs 13 (-75 to 358)%; p = 0.44]. At follow-up, the median bone attenuation loss was significantly greater with PRV than with ATV [-2.6 (-27 to 11)% vs 0 (-11 to 25)%; p < 0.001]. The attenuation loss in the PRV group was comparable to that of a historical untreated general population sample. In the entire cohort, the changes in LDL-C and total cholesterol were inversely correlated with bone attenuation change (p < 0.01). In adjusted multivariable linear regression analyses, race and percent change in LDL-C were independent predictors of bone attenuation change. Age, body mass index, history of smoking, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, or hormone replacement therapy did not affect percent change in BMD.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the hypothesis that there is an interaction between bone and cardiometabolic health and that intensive lipid lowering has a beneficial effect on bone health.

Biomaterials combined with ADSCs for bone tissue engineering: current advances and applications

In recent decades, bone tissue engineering, which is supported by scaffold, seed cells and bioactive molecules (BMs), has provided new hope and direction for treating bone defects. In terms of seed cells, compared to bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, which were widely utilized in previous years, adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) are becoming increasingly favored by researchers due to their abundant sources, easy availability and multi-differentiation potentials. However, there is no systematic theoretical basis for selecting appropriate biomaterials loaded with ADSCs. In this review, the regulatory effects of various biomaterials on the behavior of ADSCs are summarized from four perspectives, including biocompatibility, inflammation regulation, angiogenesis and osteogenesis, to illustrate the potential of combining various materials with ADSCs for the treatment of bone defects. In addition, we conclude the influence of additional application of various BMs on the bone repair effect of ADSCs, in order to provide more evidences and support for the selection or preparation of suitable biomaterials and BMs to work with ADSCs. More importantly, the associated clinical case reports and experiments are generalized to provide additional ideas for the clinical transformation and application of bone tissue engineering loaded with ADSCs.

Simvastatin therapy in higher dosages deteriorates bone quality: Consistent evidence from population-wide patient data and interventional mouse studies

BACKGROUND

Combining mouse experiments with big data analysis of the Austrian population, we investigated the association between high-dose statin treatment and bone quality.

METHODS

The bone microarchitecture of the femur and vertebral body L4 was measured in male and ovariectomized female mice on a high-fat diet containing simvastatin (1.2 g/kg). A sex-specific matched big data analysis of Austrian health insurance claims using multiple logistic regression models was conducted (simvastatin 60-80 mg/day vs. controls; males: n = 138,666; females: n = 155,055).

RESULTS

High-dose simvastatin impaired bone quality in male and ovariectomized mice. In the trabecular femur, simvastatin reduced bone volume (µm³: ♂, 213 ± 15 vs. 131 ± 7, p < 0.0001; ♀, 66 ± 7 vs. 44 ± 5, p = 0.02) and trabecular number (1/mm: ♂, 1.88 ± 0.09 vs. 1.27 ± 0.06, p < 0.0001; ♀, 0.60 ± 0.05 vs. 0.43 ± 0.04, p = 0.01). In the cortical femur, bone volume (mm³: ♂, 1.44 ± 0.03 vs. 1.34 ± 0.03, p = 0.009; ♀, 1.33 ± 0.03 vs. 1.12 ± 0.03, p = 0.0002) and cortical thickness were impaired (µm: ♂, 211 ± 4 vs. 189 ± 4, p = 0.0004; ♀, 193 ± 3 vs. 169 ± 3, p < 0.0001). Similar impairments were found in vertebral body L4. Simvastatin-induced changes in weight or glucose metabolism were excluded as mediators of deteriorations in bone quality. Results from mice were supported by a matched cohort analysis showing an association between high-dose simvastatin and increased risk of osteoporosis in patients (♂, OR: 5.91, CI: 3.17-10.99, p < 0.001; ♀, OR: 4.16, CI: 2.92-5.92, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

High-dose simvastatin dramatically reduces bone quality in obese male and ovariectomized female mice, suggesting that direct drug action accounts for the association between high dosage and increased risk of osteoporosis as observed in comparable human cohorts. The underlying pathophysiological mechanisms behind this relationship are presently unknown and require further investigation.

Stains therapy and the risk of all bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

AIMS

Statins had been used as a cornerstone in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Widespread attention had been given to the risk of bleeding, especially intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in patients receiving statins therapy. This study aimed to determine whether statins treatment was associated with the risk of bleeding and ICH in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for studies up to September 8, 2022. Articles from RCTs were included in the meta-analysis if they reported the bleeding events associated with the treatment of statins or placebo/nonstatin treatment. The risk ratios (RR) of total bleeding and ICH were pooled from the number of patients with each outcome in the statins and control groups from the included studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies comprising 145,929 individuals (2437 incident bleeding cases) were included in the meta-analysis. After a median follow-up duration of 3.65 years, statins treatment was not associated with the risk of all bleeding (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.93-1.15). Furthermore, in 26 studies comprising 144,177 participants, after a median follow-up duration of 3.95 years, statins treatment was not associated with the risk of ICH (RR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.84-1.31). Although in the subgroup analysis with patients with prior stroke, statins treatment showed an increased risk of ICH (RR = 1.47, 95% CI 1.07-2.01), sensitivity analysis showed that the result was unstable, which may be mainly driven by the SPARCL study.

CONCLUSIONS

Statins therapy is not associated with the risk of all bleeding and ICH. Although a mildly increased risk of ICH in patients with prior stroke is observed, which may be caused by chance finding and warrant further documentation.

Statin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

A 2016 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) was associated with reduced mortality and cardiovascular outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2016 review on statins for primary prevention of CVD to inform the USPSTF.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to November 2021); surveillance through May 20, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials on statins vs placebo or no statin and statin intensity in adults without prior cardiovascular events; large cohort studies on harms.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

All-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, composite cardiovascular outcomes, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included: 22 trials (N = 90 624) with 6 months to 6 years of follow-up compared statins vs placebo or no statin, 1 trial (n = 5144) compared statin intensities, and 3 observational studies (n = 417 523) reported harms. Statins were significantly associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.87 to 0.98]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.35% [95% CI, -0.57% to -0.14%]), stroke (RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.90]; ARD, -0.39% [95% CI, -0.54% to -0.25%]), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.75]; ARD, -0.85% [95% CI, -1.22% to -0.47%]), and composite cardiovascular outcomes (RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81]; ARD, -1.28% [95% CI, -1.61% to -0.95%]); the association with cardiovascular mortality was not statistically significant (RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.02]; ARD, -0.13%). Relative benefits were consistent in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics, although data for persons older than 75 years were sparse. Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased risk of serious adverse events (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.01]), myalgias (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.11]), or elevated alanine aminotransferase level (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.13]). Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased diabetes risk overall (RR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.19]), although 1 trial found high-intensity statin therapy was significantly associated with increased risk (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.49]). Otherwise, there were no clear differences in outcomes based on statin intensity.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In adults at increased CVD risk but without prior CVD events, statin therapy for primary prevention of CVD was associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality and CVD events. Benefits of statin therapy appear to be present across diverse demographic and clinical populations, with consistent relative benefits in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics.

Low dose hydrophilic statins are the preferred agents for females at risk of osteoporosis

Objectives

The correlation between atherosclerosis and osteoporosis, independent of age, is clear. Multifactorial co-dependence between bone mineral density (BMD) and statin dose has been proposed. It is hypothesised that inhibition of the synthesis of cholesterol will also inhibit the synthesis of sex hormones and Vitamin D, negatively affecting BMD. This study aims to evaluate hydrophilic and non-hydrophilic statins effect on osteoporosis and analyse any possible superiority of one agent over the other within the group.

Methods

We identified 538 caucasian females who had a DEXA scan performed between 2002 and 2016 (age 60-89) in one DEXA center in Mid-West Ireland. A DEXA T-score results were analysed in the current study. Two hundred fifty females were not on statin therapy, and 323 females were on statin therapy. Females on therapy were separated into the atorvastatin group (N = 190), rosuvastatin group (N = 97), and pravastatin group (N = 36), comprising low dose and high dose groups. All anonymised data were analysed with SPSS statistical. To test the hypothesis that lower bone density is associated with high dose statins, an independent sample t-test was performed. The one-way between-groups ANOVA test was used to test the hypothesis that the BMD level depended on the statin's potency.

Results

Statin-naïve females have a statistically higher bone mineral density in the lumbar spine, t (538) = 3.42, p < 0.05 and in hip t (538) = 4.99, p < 0.05 than females on statin therapy. There was a significant difference in patient's age between the group, and no significant correlation was found between the patient's age and type of statin or bone density. In the atorvastatin group statistically, significant results were obtained both for spine and hip bone mineral density, t (188) = -5.61, p < 0.05 and t (188) = -3.62, p < 0.05, respectively. In the rosuvastatin group, statistically, a significant result was noted for bone mineral density of hip t (95) = -3.52, p < 0.05. This demonstrates a dose-dependency between bone mineral density and the dose of the statin. The independent between-group ANOVA yielded a statistically significant effect, F (2, 59) = 6.69, p < 0.05, η2 = 0.21 in the spine. Thus, patients on lipophilic statins had statistically lower BMD than females on hydrophilic statins. Multilinear regression analysis identified that age is not a statistically significant contributor in our analysis; however, the trend of decrease in bone mineral density with women's age is acknowledged by authors.

Conclusions

The study results support the theory that bone mineral density decreases with an increase in a statin dose, and hydrophilic statins, like pravastatin, have a better metabolic profile in the lumbar spine than lipophilic agents.

The associations of statin intake and the trabecular bone score and bone mineral density status in elderly Iranian individuals: a cross-sectional analysis of the Bushehr Elderly Health (BEH) program

In recent years, a growing interest on the impact of statin intake on bone health has emerged, although the reported results are controversial. The results of this study revealed that BMD at lumbar spine has a significant association with statin intake. However, such association appears to be weaker regarding TBS values compared to BMD. This study was performed with the aim of evaluating associations of statin intake with BMD and TBS using data from 2426 individuals aged ≥ 60 years from the second phase of the Bushehr Elderly Health (BEH) program. We found a positive association between statin and BMD at lumbar spine, whereas association between statin and TBS was detected only in the men in the final model.

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, a growing interest has been established to evaluate the impact of statin intake on bone health, although the reported results are controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the association of statin intake with bone health status according to BMD and TBS.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analysis used data from the elderly Iranian individuals who participated in the Bushehr Elderly Health (BEH) program. Dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) device was used to evaluate the BMD at lumbar spine (L1-L4), femoral neck, and total hip, as well as TBS at lumbar spine.

RESULTS

Among 2426 (1260 women and 1166 men) study participants, 778 were statin users. A positive significant association, irrespective of sex, was observed between statin intake and BMD at L1-L4, even after controlling for potential variables in total population (β = 0.016, p = 0.013). The mean TBS values at L1-L4 were negatively associated with statin intake in total population (β =  - 0.009, p = 0.001), while in the full adjusted model, significant positive association between TBS and statin intake was detected only in men (β = 0.013, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study revealed that BMD at lumbar spine has a significant association with statin intake. However, such an association appears to be weaker regarding TBS values compared to BMD.

Associations between statins and adverse events in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review with pairwise, network, and dose-response meta-analyses

OBJECTIVE

To assess the associations between statins and adverse events in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and to examine how the associations vary by type and dosage of statins.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Studies were identified from previous systematic reviews and searched in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, up to August 2020.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised controlled trials in adults without a history of cardiovascular disease that compared statins with non-statin controls or compared different types or dosages of statins were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were common adverse events: self-reported muscle symptoms, clinically confirmed muscle disorders, liver dysfunction, renal insufficiency, diabetes, and eye conditions. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction, stroke, and death from cardiovascular disease as measures of efficacy.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A pairwise meta-analysis was conducted to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for each outcome between statins and non-statin controls, and the absolute risk difference in the number of events per 10 000 patients treated for a year was estimated. A network meta-analysis was performed to compare the adverse effects of different types of statins. An E_max model based meta-analysis was used to examine the dose-response relationships of the adverse effects of each statin.

RESULTS

62 trials were included, with 120 456 participants followed up for an average of 3.9 years. Statins were associated with an increased risk of self-reported muscle symptoms (21 trials, odds ratio 1.06 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.13); absolute risk difference 15 (95% confidence interval 1 to 29)), liver dysfunction (21 trials, odds ratio 1.33 (1.12 to 1.58); absolute risk difference 8 (3 to 14)), renal insufficiency (eight trials, odds ratio 1.14 (1.01 to 1.28); absolute risk difference 12 (1 to 24)), and eye conditions (six trials, odds ratio 1.23 (1.04 to 1.47); absolute risk difference 14 (2 to 29)) but were not associated with clinically confirmed muscle disorders or diabetes. The increased risks did not outweigh the reduction in the risk of major cardiovascular events. Atorvastatin, lovastatin, and rosuvastatin were individually associated with some adverse events, but few significant differences were found between types of statins. An E_max dose-response relationship was identified for the effect of atorvastatin on liver dysfunction, but the dose-response relationships for the other statins and adverse effects were inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

For primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, the risk of adverse events attributable to statins was low and did not outweigh their efficacy in preventing cardiovascular disease, suggesting that the benefit-to-harm balance of statins is generally favourable. Evidence to support tailoring the type or dosage of statins to account for safety concerns before starting treatment was limited.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020169955.

Role of Metabolism in Bone Development and Homeostasis

Carbohydrates, fats, and proteins are the underlying energy sources for animals and are catabolized through specific biochemical cascades involving numerous enzymes. The catabolites and metabolites in these metabolic pathways are crucial for many cellular functions; therefore, an imbalance and/or dysregulation of these pathways causes cellular dysfunction, resulting in various metabolic diseases. Bone, a highly mineralized organ that serves as a skeleton of the body, undergoes continuous active turnover, which is required for the maintenance of healthy bony components through the deposition and resorption of bone matrix and minerals. This highly coordinated event is regulated throughout life by bone cells such as osteoblasts, osteoclasts, and osteocytes, and requires synchronized activities from different metabolic pathways. Here, we aim to provide a comprehensive review of the cellular metabolism involved in bone development and homeostasis, as revealed by mouse genetic studies.

Effects of systemic medication on root resorption associated with orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review of animal studies

BACKGROUND

Theoretically, root resorption could be modulated by any medication taken that exhibits possible effects on the implicated molecular pathways.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically investigate and appraise the quality of the available evidence from animal studies, regarding the effect of commonly prescribed systemic medication on root resorption associated with orthodontic tooth movement.

SEARCH METHODS

Search without restrictions in eight databases (PubMed, Central, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Arab World Research Source, ClinicalTrials.gov, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global) and hand searching until April 2018 took place. One author developed detailed search strategies for each database that were based on the PubMed strategy and adapted accordingly.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled studies investigating the effect of systemic medications on root resorption associated with orthodontic tooth movement.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Following study retrieval and selection, relevant data were extracted and the risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE's Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were finally identified, most of which at unclear risk of bias. Root resorption was shown to increase in Vitamin C treated animals in comparison with the control group, whereas a comparative decrease was noted after the administration of the alendronate, ibuprofen, growth hormone, low doses of meloxicam, simvastatin, lithium chloride and strontium ranelate. No difference was noted for acetaminophen, aspirin, fluoxetine, atorvastatin, misoprostol, zoledronic acid and zinc. Finally, inconsistent effects were observed after the administration of celecoxib, prednisolone and L-thyroxine. The quality of the available evidence was considered at best as low.

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmaceutical substances investigated were shown to exhibit variable effects on root resorption. Although the overall quality of evidence provides the clinician with a cautious perspective on the strength of the relevant recommendations, good practice would suggest that it is important to identify patients consuming medications and consider the possible implications.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42017078208).

Atorvastatin promotes bone formation in aged apoE-/- mice through the Sirt1-Runx2 axis

Background

Statins are the most widely used drugs in elderly patients; the most common clinical application of statins is in aged hyperlipemia patients. There are few studies on the effects and mechanisms of statins on bone in elderly mice with hyperlipemia. The study is to examine the effects of atorvastatin on bone phenotypes and metabolism in aged apolipoprotein E-deficient (apoE^–/–) mice, and the possible mechanisms involved in these changes.

Methods

Twenty-four 60-week-old apoE^–/– mice were randomly allocated to two groups. Twelve mice were orally gavaged with atorvastatin (10 mg/kg body weight/day) for 12 weeks; the others served as the control group. Bone mass and skeletal microarchitecture were determined using micro-CT. Bone metabolism was assessed by serum analyses, qRT-PCR, and Western blot. Bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) from apoE^–/– mice were differentiated into osteoblasts and treated with atorvastatin and silent information regulator 1 (Sirt1) inhibitor EX-527.

Results

The results showed that long-term administration of atorvastatin increases bone mass and improves bone microarchitecture in trabecular bone but not in cortical bone. Furthermore, the serum bone formation marker osteocalcin (OCN) was ameliorated by atorvastatin, whereas the bone resorption marker tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b (Trap5b) did not appear obviously changes after the treatment of atorvastatin. The mRNA expression of Sirt1, runt-related transcription factor 2 (Runx2), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and OCN in bone tissue were increased after atorvastatin administration. Western blot showed same trend in Sirt1 and Runx2. The in vitro study showed that when BMSCs from apoE^–/– mice were pretreated with EX527, the higher expression of Runx2, ALP, and OCN activated by atorvastatin decreased significantly or showed no difference compared with the control. The protein expression of Runx2 showed same trend.

Conclusions

Accordingly, the current study validates the hypothesis that atorvastatin can increase bone mass and promote osteogenesis in aged apoE^−/− mice by regulating the Sirt1–Runx2 axis.

Meta-Analysis of Usefulness of Treatment of Hypercholesterolemia With Statins for Primary Prevention in Patients Older Than 75 Years

Clinical guidelines from the United States and Europe do not recommend treatment with statins for primary prevention in patients with hypercholesterolemia who are older than 75 years. Data from 35 randomized controlled trials in this age group where statin therapy for primary prevention was compared with placebo or usual care were analyzed. Using all-cause death as the outcome, we performed 2 types of analyses: frequentist and Bayesian. Frequentist analysis indicated no significant difference in mortality between cases (on statins) and controls (on placebo or usual care, p = 0.16). However, in the Bayesian analysis, patients >75 years had lower mortality from treatment with statins (p = 0.03). In conclusion, Bayesian analysis indicates a definite, statistically significant and clinically relevant benefit of statin treatment for primary prevention in patients >75 years of age.

Adjuvant drug-assisted bone healing: Part III - Further strategies for local and systemic modulation

In this third in a series of reviews on adjuvant drug-assisted bone healing, further approaches aiming at influencing the healing process are discussed. Local and systemic modulation of bone metabolism is pursued with use of a number of drugs with completely different indications, which are characterized by a pleiotropic spectrum of action. These include drugs used to treat lipid disorders (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors), hypertension (ACE inhibitors), osteoporosis (bisphosphonates), cancer (proteasome inhibitors) and others. Potential applications to enhance bone healing are discussed.

Infográficos para decisão compartilhada no uso de estatinas em paciente de alto risco cardiovascular

Objetivos: Elaborar infográficos para decisão compartilhada sobre o benefício e risco do uso de estatinas como prevenção primária em pacientes com alto risco cardiovascular. Métodos: A partir do “the NNT”, que analisou o uso de estatinas para prevenção primária em pessoas de baixo risco cardiovascular a partir de meta-análises do US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) e da Cochrane, buscou-se definir o balanço de risco e benefício dessa terapia na prevenção primária de pessoas com alto risco. Como o USPSTF e a Cochrane tinham 10 estudos primários diferentes incluídos em suas análises e populações com risco cardiovascular variável, foi realizada uma busca adicional por revisões sistemáticas e meta-análises publicadas desde a data da revisão Cochrane (dezembro de 2012) até outubro de 2017. Buscou-se no Medline via PubMed, na Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, na Cochrane e no NHS Evidence por estudos de pessoas com risco cardiovascular estimado em 10 anos de mais de 10% com mais um fator de risco ou com mais de 20%, sem história de doença cardiovascular prévia, que comparassem o uso de estatina com placebo ou nenhum tratamento. Os desfechos deveriam ser a redução de doenças cardio e cerebrovasculares, da mortalidade cardiovascular ou geral e a ocorrência de eventos adversos. Resultados: Foram encontrados 225 estudos entre meta-análises e revisões sistemáticas elaboradas desde dezembro de 2012 até outubro de 2017. Foram excluídos 224 estudos por motivos diversos. Selecionou-se para elaboração do infográfico de benefícios o Statins for primary prevention, 2012, com população de 100% de diabéticos sem eventos cardiovasculares prévios com redução de risco absoluto (RRA) quanto a AVC fatal de 0,78 pontos percentuais/NNT 128 e Doenças Cardio/Cerebrovasculares RRA 2,6 pontos percentuais/NNT 39, cardiovascular. Quanto à redução de mortalidade geral (RR 0,79; IC95% 0,58-1,08) e revascularização (RR 0,74; IC 95% 0,55-1,00) não foi encontrada diferença estatística significante. Devido às limitações encontradas nas revisões sistemáticas avaliadas, não foi possível compilar dados, no formato de infográfico, sobre a incidência de diabetes e abandono de terapia. Assim, para elaboração da parte referente a danos, foi selecionado o ECR Aspen, com população de diabéticos de alto risco para desenvolvimento de eventos cardiovasculares, sem eventos prévios, quanto à mialgia com aumento do risco absoluto (ARA) de 1,43 pontos percentuais/NND 70 (RR 1,91; IC95% 1,03-3,53). Conclusão: Foi elaborado infográfico, com e sem uso de estatina, para desfechos cardiocerebrovasculares não fatais, AVC fatal, necessidade de revascularização, mortalidade geral e para ocorrência adversa de sintomas musculares. Esse instrumento pode ser utilizado na Atenção Primária durante o encontro clínico visando à tomada de decisão compartilhada, facilitando a compreensão dos riscos e benefícios do uso de estatina em pacientes de alto risco cardiovascular (RCV 10% com pelo menos um fator de risco adicional ou > 20 % em 10 anos), diabéticos, nos quais a prescrição de estatina seja cogitada.

Lipid Lowering Therapy, Low-Density Lipoprotein Level and Risk of Intracerebral Hemorrhage - A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The association of lipid lowering therapy and intracerebral hemorrhage risk is controversial.

METHODS

We performed a cumulative meta-analysis of lipid lowering trials that reported intracerebral hemorrhage. Statin, fibrate, ezetimibe, PCSK9, and CETP trials were included. We explored whether the association of lipid lowering therapy and risk of intracerebral hemorrhage may vary by baseline low-density lipoprotein (LDL) level, mean change in LDL or baseline cardiovascular risk of population.

RESULTS

Among 39 trials (287,651 participants), lipid lowering therapy was not associated with a statistically significant increased risk of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) in primary and secondary prevention trials combined (odds ratio [OR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], .98-1.28). Lipid lowering was associated with an increased risk of ICH in secondary prevention trials (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.00-1.38), but not in primary prevention trials (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, .78-1.30), but the test for interaction was not significant (P for interaction = .31). Meta-regression of baseline LDL or difference in LDL reduction between active and control did not explain significant heterogeneity between studies for ICH risk. Of 1000 individuals treated for 1 year for secondary prevention, we estimated 9.17 (95% CI, 5.78-12.66) fewer ischemic strokes and .48 (95% CI, .06-1.02) more ICH, and a net reduction of 8.69 in all stroke per 1000 person-years.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of lipid lowering therapy in prevention of ischemic stroke greatly exceed the risk of ICH. Concern about ICH should not discourage stroke clinicians from prescribing lipid lowering therapy for secondary prevention of ischemic stroke.

Does common prescription medication affect the rate of orthodontic tooth movement? A systematic review

Background

As the taking of any medication may theoretically affect the complex pathways responsible for periodontal tissue homeostasis and the events leading to orthodontic tooth movement, it is considered important for the orthodontist to be able to identify prospective patients' history and patterns of pharmaceutical consumption.

Objective

To systematically investigate and appraise the quality of the available evidence regarding the effect of commonly prescribed medications on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement.

Search methods

Search without restrictions in eight databases and hand searching until June 2017.

Selection criteria

Controlled studies investigating the effect of commonly prescribed medications with emphasis on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement.

Data collection and analysis

Following study retrieval and selection, relevant data was extracted and the risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE's Risk of Bias Tool.

Results

Twenty-seven animal studies, involving various pharmacologic and orthodontic interventions, were finally identified. Most studies were assessed to be at unclear or high risk of bias. The rate of orthodontic tooth movement was shown to increase after the administration of diazepam, Vitamin C and pantoprazole, while simvastatin, atorvastatin, calcium compounds, strontium ranelate, propranolol, losartan, famotidine, cetirizine, and metformin decreased the rate of orthodontic tooth movement. No interference with the rate of orthodontic tooth movement was reported for phenytoin, phenobarbital and zinc compounds, whereas, inconsistent or conflicting effects were noted after the administration of L-thyroxine, lithium compounds, fluoxetine and insulin. The quality of the available evidence was considered at best as low.

Conclusions

Commonly prescribed medications may exhibit variable effects on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement. Although the quality of evidence was considered at best as low, raising reservations about the strength of the relevant recommendations, the clinician should be capable of identifying patients taking medications and should take into consideration the possible implications related to the proposed treatment.

Registration

PROSPERO (CRD42015029130).

Comparative impact of systemic delivery of atorvastatin, simvastatin, and lovastatin on bone mineral density of the ovariectomized rats

PURPOSE

In addition to lipid-lowering properties, statins have been suggested to affect bone turnover by increasing the osteoblastic bone formation and blocking the osteoclastogenesis. However, there are many controversial reports regarding the beneficial effect of statins on osteoporosis. In this study, we investigated the therapeutic effects of the most important lipophilic statins administered orally for 60 days to the ovariectomized (OVX) female Sprague-Dawley rats and compared the effects on different harvested trabecular and compact bones.

METHODS

Thirty female rats were divided into five equal groups including the normal rats, untreated OVX rats (negative control), and the OVX rats treated with atorvastatin (20 mg/kg/day), simvastatin (25 mg/kg/day), and lovastatin (20 mg/kg/day). The osteoporotic animals were treated daily for 60 days and euthanized at the end of experiments. The effectiveness of these treatments was evaluated by biomechanical testing, histopathologic, histomorphometric, micro-CT scan, real-time PCR, and serum biochemical analysis. Moreover, the hepatotoxicity and rhabdomyolysis related with these treatments were assessed by biochemistry analysis and histopathological evaluation.

RESULTS

The results and statistical analysis showed that systemic delivery of simvastatin and lovastatin significantly increased serum calcium level, expression of osteogenic genes, bone mineral density (BMD), and biomechanical properties in comparison to the untreated OVX rats, especially in trabecular bones (P < 0.05). The results of different analysis also indicated that there was no statistical difference between the atorvastatin-treated animals and the negative control. Among all treatments, only atorvastatin showed an evident hepatotoxicity and myopathy.

CONCLUSIONS

It was concluded that the lovastatin and simvastatin efficiently ameliorated the OVX-induced osteoporosis. Moreover, the simvastatin-treated animals showed more resemblance to the normal group in terms of BMD, expression of osteogenic genes, serum biochemical parameters, histomorphometric findings, and biomechanical performance with no significant side-effects.

Exposure to statins is associated to fracture risk reduction in elderly people with cardiovascular disease: evidence from the AIFA-I-GrADE observational project

PURPOSE

Conflicting findings were observed from clinical trials and observational studies evaluating the association between the use of statins and the risk of fracture. A case-control study nested into a cohort of elderly patients on treatment with statins for cardiovascular secondary prevention was performed on this issue.

METHODS

The cohort was formed by 13 875 individuals aged ≥65 years from several Italian health units receiving statins after hospital discharge for cardiovascular outcomes. From this cohort, 964 patients who experienced fracture were identified (i.e., cases). Up to five controls were randomly selected for each case from the underlying cohort. Conditional logistic regression was used to model the risk of fracture associated with adherence to statins, which was measured from the proportion of days covered (PDC) by treatment. A set of sensitivity analyses was performed in order to account for sources of systematic uncertainty.

RESULTS

Compared with patients with low adherence (PDC ≤ 40%), those on intermediate (PDC 41-80%) and high (PDC > 80%) adherence exhibited a risk reduction of 21% (95% confidence interval 6% to 23%) and 25% (7% to 40%). Similar effects were observed among patients younger and older than 80 years, as well as among men, while there was no evidence that adherence to statins affected the risk of fracture among women. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the associations were consistent and robust.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of statins for secondary cardiovascular prevention is associated with fracture risk reduction in elderly people. Further studies are required to better clarify the statin-fracture association in postmenopausal women. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Statins for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Cardiovascular disease (CVD), the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the United States, may be potentially preventable with statin therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review benefits and harms of statins for prevention of CVD to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (from 1991), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (from 2005) to June 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials of statins vs placebo, fixed-dose vs titrated statins, and higher- vs lower-intensity statins in adults without prior cardiovascular events.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

One investigator abstracted data, a second checked data for accuracy, and 2 investigators independently assessed study quality using predefined criteria. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

All-cause mortality, CVD-related morbidity or mortality, and harms.

RESULTS

Nineteen trials (n = 71 344 participants [range, 95-17 802]; mean age, 51-66 years) compared statins vs placebo or no statin. Statin therapy was associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.86 [95% CI, 0.80 to 0.93]; I2 = 0%; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.40% [95% CI, -0.64% to -0.17%]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.54 to 0.88]; I2 = 54%; ARD, -0.43% [95% CI, -0.75% to -0.11%]), stroke (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.82]; I2 = 0; ARD, -0.38% [95% CI, -0.53% to -0.23%]), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.71]; I2 = 0%; ARD, -0.81% [95% CI, -1.19 to -0.43%]), and composite cardiovascular outcomes (RR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.63 to 0.78]; I2 = 36%; ARD, -1.39% [95% CI, -1.79 to -0.99%]). Relative benefits appeared consistent in demographic and clinical subgroups, including populations without marked hyperlipidemia (total cholesterol level <200 mg/dL); absolute benefits were higher in subgroups at higher baseline risk. Statins were not associated with increased risk of serious adverse events (RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.94 to 1.04]), myalgias (RR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.16]), or liver-related harms (RR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.35]). In pooled analysis, statins were not associated with increased risk of diabetes (RR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.20]), although statistical heterogeneity was present (I2 = 52%), and 1 trial found high-intensity statins associated with increased risk (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.49]). No trial directly compared titrated vs fixed-dose statins, and there were no clear differences based on statin intensity.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In adults at increased CVD risk but without prior CVD events, statin therapy was associated with reduced risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and CVD events, with greater absolute benefits in patients at greater baseline risk.

Effects of Statins on Bone Mineral Density and Fracture Risk: A PRISMA-compliant Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Although observational studies have identified the protective effect of statins on bone health, the effects remain controversial in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate the effects of statins on bone mineral density (BMD) and fracture risk among adults.We searched electronic databases of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and conducted a bibliography review to identify articles published until May, 2015.Studies included in this meta-analysis should be randomized controlled trials conducted in adults, using statins in the intervention group. Information on changes in BMD or odds ratio, relative risk or hazard ratio (HR) for fracture risk with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was provided.Two investigators independently reviewed the title or abstract, further reviewed the full-texts and extracted information on study characteristics and study outcomes. Net change estimates of BMD and pooled HR of fracture risk comparing the intervention group with the control group were estimated across trials using random-effects models.Of the relevant 334 citations, 7 trials (including 27,900 randomized participants in total) meeting the eligibility criteria were included. Of the 7 trials, 5 were conducted to assess the association of statins use with BMD change and 2 with fracture risk. Compared with the control group, statins use was associated with significant increase in BMD of 0.03 g/cm (95% CI: 0.006, 0.053; I = 99.2%; P < 0.001), but null association with fracture risk, with the pooled HR of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.87, 1.15; I = 0; P = 0.396). Sensitivity analyses revealed that the associations were consistent and robust.The effect of statins use on bone health among subpopulation could not be identified due to limited number of trials.These findings provide evidence that statins could be used to increase BMD other than decreasing fracture risk in participant with dyslipidemia. In addition, further trials with the primary outcome of bone health-related measurements in subpopulation are warranted to ensure the effect of statins use.

The effects of atorvastatin on the prevention of osteoporosis and dyslipidemia in the high-fat-fed ovariectomized rats

Previous studies reported that statins showed positive effects on bone in both human and animal models. This study aimed to investigate the effects of atorvastatin on the prevention of osteoporosis and dyslipidemia in ovariectomized rats fed with high-fat emulsion. The 3-month-old female rats were subjected to either sham operations (n = 8) or ovariectomized operations (OVX, n = 24). The OVX rats were orally administered deionized water (n = 8) or standardized high-fat emulsion without (n = 8) or with atorvastatin (n = 8). All rats were injected twice with calcein before sacrificed for the purpose of double in vivo labeling. After 12 weeks, all rats were sacrificed under anesthesia. Biochemistry, histomorphometry, mechanical test, micro-computed tomography analysis, mechanical test, histology, and component analysis were performed. We found that high-fat emulsion significantly decreased body weight, bone formation, collagen content of bone, and bone biomechanics, while increased blood, liver, and bone marrow lipids. Atorvastatin treatment prevented dyslipidemia, reversed hepatic steatosis, optimized composition of bone, and improved bone mechanical properties. The current study provided further evidence that atorvastatin might be useful for the treatment of osteoporotic patients with dyslipidemia.

The effects of improved metabolic risk factors on bone turnover markers after 12 weeks of simvastatin treatment with or without exercise

OBJECTIVE

Emerging evidence supports an association between metabolic risk factors and bone turnover. Statins and exercise independently improve metabolic risk factors; however whether improvements in metabolic risk factor affects bone turnover is unknown. The purpose of the present study was to: 1) evaluate the relationship between metabolic risk factors and bone turnover; and 2) determine if improvements in metabolic risk factors after 12 weeks of statin treatment, exercise or the combination affect bone turnover.

METHODS

Fifty participants with ≥2 metabolic syndrome defining characteristics were randomly assigned to one of three groups: statin (STAT: simvastatin, 40 mg/day), exercise (EX: brisk walking and/or slow jogging, 45 minutes/day, 5 days/week), or the combination (STAT+EX). Body composition and whole body bone mineral density were measured with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry. Serum markers of bone formation (bone specific alkaline phosphatase, BAP; osteocalcin, OC), resorption (C-terminal peptide of type I collagen, CTX) and metabolic risk factors were determined. Two-factor (time, group) repeated-measures ANCOVA was used to examine changes of metabolic risk factors and bone turnover. General linear models were used to determine the effect of pre-treatment metabolic risk factors on post-treatment bone turnover marker outcomes.

RESULTS

Participants with ≥4 metabolic syndrome defining characteristics had lower pre-treatment OC than those with 3 or fewer. OC was negatively correlated with glucose, and CTX was positively correlated with cholesterol. STAT or STAT+EX lowered total and LDL cholesterol. The OC to CTX ratio decreased in all groups with no other significant changes in bone turnover. Higher pre-treatment insulin or body fat predicted a greater CTX reduction and a greater BAP/CTX increase.

CONCLUSION

Metabolic risk factors were negatively associated with bone turnover markers. Short-term statin treatment with or without exercise lowered cholesterol and all treatments had a small effect on bone turnover.

Osteoporosis in the at-risk asthmatic

The effect of inhaled glucocorticosteroids (ICS) on bone metabolism and subsequent osteoporosis is controversial. Explanations for this controversy include various study designs, duration of use, outcome measures, and population demographics of research studies with intranasal or inhalational ICS. Patients with poorly controlled asthma are at greatest risk of osteoporosis because they are commonly treated with intermittent or continuous systemic corticosteroids (SCS) or high-dose ICS. A 45-year-old Caucasian woman presents with moderate-to-severe asthma with frequent albuterol use and nighttime awakenings at least once weekly. She is on fluticasone/salmeterol 500/50 μg one inhalation twice daily and montelukast 10 mg/day. She requires prednisone 15 mg three times per day for 5 days up to three times a year. Is this patient at greater risk of osteopenia, characterized by a T-score between -1.0 and -2.5, and subsequent osteoporosis and an increased risk of fractures? If she has osteopenia, should she be treated with a bisphosphonate? The risk of osteoporosis and fracture increases significantly with frequent administration of SCS, and patients on such medications should undergo preventative measures and treatment. This study discuses factors that contribute to an increased risk of osteoporosis/osteopenia in patients with asthma and suggests recommendations based on the current literature.

Bone mineral density in statin users: a population-based analysis from a Spanish cohort

We studied 2,315 subjects (1,422 women and 893 men) from the Camargo Cohort and analyzed the differences in BMD between statin or non-statin users. We also studied effects of the type of statin, dose, pharmacokinetic properties, and length of treatment on bone mineral density (BMD). Of the subjects, 478 (21 %) were taking statins (256 women and 222 men). Overall, they had higher BMD than non-users (p < 0.0001). In adjusted multivariate models, women taking statins had higher BMD at femoral neck (p = 0.002) and total hip (p = 0.04) than non- users. No differences were found in men. Women taking simvastatin had higher increases in BMD than non-statin users at femoral neck (p = 0.02) and total hip (p = 0.009), those taking fluvastatin had lower BMD values at lumbar spine (p = 0.028), and those receiving lovastatin had higher increases at femoral neck (p = 0.006). In men, only atorvastatin was associated with higher femoral neck BMD than non-statin use (p = 0.029). Comparing with non-statin users, only women receiving lipophilic statins had greater BMD at femoral neck (p = 0.003). According to drug potency, women on high- or lower-potency agents showed higher BMD values at femoral neck than non-users (p = 0.028 and 0.022, respectively). In men, only high-potency statins were associated with higher femoral neck BMD than non-use (p = 0.021). No differences between dose or length of statin therapy were noted regarding BMD in either sex. In summary, in a large population-based cohort, women on statins had higher BMD at the hip than non-users. Overall, this increase in BMD was more evident in subjects on lipophilic or high-potency statins.

Statins, bone metabolism and treatment of bone catabolic diseases

The discovery that statins had bone anabolic properties initiated many investigations into their use for treatment of bone catabolic diseases, such as osteoporosis. This paper reviews the molecular basis of statin's role in bone metabolism, and animal and human studies on the impact of systemic statins on osteoporosis-induced bone fracture incidence and healing, and on bone density. Limitations of systemic statins are described along with alternative dosing strategies, including local applications and bone-targeting systemic preparations. The principal findings of this review are: (1) traditional oral dosing with statins results in minimal efficacy in the treatment of osteoporosis; (2) local applications of statins show promise in the treatment of accessible bony defects, such as periodontitis; and (3) systemically administered statins which can target bone or inflammation near bone may be the safest and most effective strategy in the treatment of osseous deficiencies.

Determinants of bone marrow adiposity: the modulation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ2 activity as a central mechanism

Although the presence of adipocytes in the bone marrow is a normal physiological phenomenon, the role of these cells in bone homeostasis and during pathological states has not yet been fully delineated. As osteoblasts and adipocytes originate from a common progenitor, with an inverse relationship existing between osteoblastogenesis and adipogenesis, bone marrow adiposity often negatively correlates with osteoblast number and bone mineral density. Bone adiposity can be affected by several physiological and pathophysiological factors, with abnormal, elevated marrow fat resulting in a pathological state. This review focuses on the regulation of bone adiposity by physiological factors, including aging, mechanical loading and growth factor expression, as well as the pathophysiological factors, including diseases such as anorexia nervosa and dyslipidemia, and pharmacological agents such as thiazolidinediones and statins. Although these factors regulate bone marrow adiposity via a plethora of different intracellular signaling pathways, these diverse pathways often converge on the modulation of the expression and/or activity of the pro-adipogenic transcription factor peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-γ2, suggesting that any factor that affects PPAR-γ2 may have an impact on the fat content of bone.

Should we abandon statins in the prevention of bone fractures?

Osteoporosis increases dramatically with age. About 40 % of women in developed countries will experience an osteoporosis-related fracture in the course of their lifetime, with men experiencing approximately one-third to one-half the risk of women. The "lipid hypothesis of osteoporosis" claims for a role of oxidized lipids as a contributing factor in osteoporosis. On the other hand, statins are supposed to exert anabolic effects on the bone, either through their lipid-lowering action or signal pathways that are independent of their effects on lipid levels. The epidemiological evidence seems to suggest that higher triglycerides may give some protection against fracture, although no association with reduced fracture risk has been reported between lipid-lowering drug (except statins) users and non-users. The epidemiological evidence for a role of statins in osteoporosis is strong, with a lower fracture risk ranging from 30 to 40 % in statin users versus non-users. However, some pitfalls inherent to observational studies (high heterogeneity, residual confounding, potential publication bias) and the lack of association in randomized trials suggest caution. At the moment, the evidence for a role of statins in prevention of osteoporosis is insufficient to recommend starting statin therapy with the aim to prevent osteoporosis.

Statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: the benefits outweigh the risks

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Statins significantly reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with and without coronary heart disease. Recently, much debate has focused on use of statins for primary prevention following a class-wide safety label change by the US Food and Drug Administration amidst concerns of worsened hyperglycemia. Here, we review the evidence for statins in primary prevention and offer guidance for their appropriate use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two meta-analyses published since 2012 unequivocally support statins for primary prevention. Data from the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaborators demonstrated a 9% [relative risk (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-0.97] reduction in all-cause mortality and a 25% (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.80) reduction in major vascular events per 1.0 mmol/l reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, even among low-risk patients. A 2013 Cochrane review corroborated these findings including a 14% (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.94) reduction in all-cause mortality and a 25% (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.70-0.81) reduction in cardiovascular disease events with statin therapy despite an 18% (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01-1.39) increase in incident diabetes.

SUMMARY

Statins effectively lower atherogenic lipoproteins and result in clinically significant reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. When well tolerated, the cardiovascular benefits of statins for primary prevention generally far outweigh the reported harms.

Clinical review: Statins and trauma--a systematic review

Statins, in addition to their lipid-lowering properties, have anti-inflammatory actions. The aim of this review is to evaluate the effect of pre-injury statin use, and statin treatment following injury. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched to January 2012 for randomised and observational studies of statins in trauma patients in general, and in patients who have suffered traumatic brain injury, burns, and fractures. Of 985 identified citations, 7 (4 observational studies and 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs)) met the inclusion criteria. Two studies (both observational) were concerned with trauma patients in general, two with patients who had suffered traumatic brain injury (one observational, one RCT), two with burns patients (one observational, one RCT), and one with fracture healing (RCT). Two of the RCTs relied on surrogate outcome measures. The observational studies were deemed to be at high risk of confounding, and the RCTs at high risk of bias. Three of the observational studies suggested improvements in a number of clinical outcomes in patients taking statins prior to injury (mortality, infection, and septic shock in burns patients; mortality in trauma patients in general; mortality in brain injured patients) whereas one, also of trauma patients in general, showed no difference in mortality or infection, and an increased risk of multi-organ failure. Two of three RCTs on statin treatment in burns patients and brain injured patients showed improvements in E-selectin levels and cognitive function. The third, of patients with radial fractures, showed no acceleration in fracture union. In conclusion, there is some evidence that pre-injury statin use and post-injury statin treatment may have a beneficial effect in patients who have suffered general trauma, traumatic brain injury, and burns. However, these studies are at high risk of confounding and bias, and should be regarded as 'hypothesisgenerating'. A well-designed RCT is required to determine the therapeutic efficacy in improving outcomes in this patient population.

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and bone mineral density: a meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The association between 3-hydroxy-3methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins) and bone mineral density (BMD) is controversial because of conflicting findings from previous studies.

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of statins on BMD reported in randomized and non-randomized controlled trials. We searched PubMed and Embase, using text, medical subject headings (MeSH) and keywords "bone mineral density" and "statins" or "HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors". Our last PubMed and Embase queries were updated to August 2012. Data on participants, interventions, and outcomes from each study were abstracted independently by two authors.

RESULTS

Five case-control studies, six cohort studies and four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria. Included studies involved 34,877 subjects (3824 in the intervention group and 31,053 in the control group) in 12 different countries with ages ranging from 44 to 66 years. Statins significantly increased BMD at lumbar spine [standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.15, 95% CI 0.09-0.22], total hip (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.17-0.27) and femoral neck (SMD 0.19, 95% CI 0.09-0.29). We carried out subgroup analyses on selected populations of the cohorts. Statistically significant increases were also observed in the lumbar spine (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.04-0.21), total hip (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.17-0.28) and femoral neck BMD (SMD 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.36).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that statins may help improve and maintain BMD at the lumbar spine, hip and femoral neck, especially in Caucasians and Asians. It also provides justification for prospective RCTs to evaluate the possible role of statins in BMD in different ethnic populations, such as Latin American and Africans.

Bone turnover markers in statin users: a population-based analysis from the Camargo Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effects of statin use on bone turnover markers (BTM), in participants from a large population-based cohort.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Cross-sectional study that included 2431 subjects (1401 women and 930 men) from the Camargo Cohort. We analyzed the differences in serum BTM between statin or non-statin users, by means of a generalized linear model, adjusted for a wide set of covariates and stratified by diabetes status. We also studied the effect of the type of statin, dose, pharmacokinetic properties, and length of treatment, on BTM.

RESULTS

Five hundred subjects (21%) were taking statins (273 women and 227 men). Overall, they had lower levels of aminoterminal propeptide of type I collagen (PINP) and C-terminal telopeptide of type I collagen (CTX) than non-users (p<0.0001). BTM levels were significantly lower in diabetic women using statins, than in female non-statin users with diabetes. In men, we found similar results, but only for CTX. All the statins users had lower levels of BTM than non-users, except subjects taking fluvastatin that showed slightly higher values. In the whole sample, no differences between dose or drug-potency were noted regarding BTM. When comparing with non-statin users, only subjects taking lipophilic statins had lower BTM levels (p<0.0001). Serum CTX levels were lower in women using statins for more than 3 vs. 1-3 years (p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large population-based cohort, serum BTM were lower in participants taking statins than in non-users, and this effect was modulated by diabetes status. Overall, this decrease in BTM was more evident in subjects receiving the more lipophilic statins, especially when using for more than 3 years.

Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Reducing high blood cholesterol, a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in people with and without a past history of CVD is an important goal of pharmacotherapy. Statins are the first-choice agents. Previous reviews of the effects of statins have highlighted their benefits in people with CVD. The case for primary prevention was uncertain when the last version of this review was published (2011) and in light of new data an update of this review is required.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects, both harms and benefits, of statins in people with no history of CVD.

SEARCH METHODS

To avoid duplication of effort, we checked reference lists of previous systematic reviews. The searches conducted in 2007 were updated in January 2012. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (2022, Issue 4), MEDLINE OVID (1950 to December Week 4 2011) and EMBASE OVID (1980 to 2012 Week 1).There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of statins versus placebo or usual care control with minimum treatment duration of one year and follow-up of six months, in adults with no restrictions on total, low density lipoprotein (LDL) or high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels, and where 10% or less had a history of CVD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted data. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, fatal and non-fatal CHD, CVD and stroke events, combined endpoints (fatal and non-fatal CHD, CVD and stroke events), revascularisation, change in total and LDL cholesterol concentrations, adverse events, quality of life and costs. Odds ratios (OR) and risk ratios (RR) were calculated for dichotomous data, and for continuous data, pooled mean differences (MD) (with 95% confidence intervals (CI)) were calculated. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

The latest search found four new trials and updated follow-up data on three trials included in the original review. Eighteen randomised control trials (19 trial arms; 56,934 participants) were included. Fourteen trials recruited patients with specific conditions (raised lipids, diabetes, hypertension, microalbuminuria). All-cause mortality was reduced by statins (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.94); as was combined fatal and non-fatal CVD RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.81), combined fatal and non-fatal CHD events RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.80) and combined fatal and non-fatal stroke (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89). Reduction of revascularisation rates (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.72) was also seen. Total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol were reduced in all trials but there was evidence of heterogeneity of effects. There was no evidence of any serious harm caused by statin prescription. Evidence available to date showed that primary prevention with statins is likely to be cost-effective and may improve patient quality of life. Recent findings from the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists study using individual patient data meta-analysis indicate that these benefits are similar in people at lower (< 1% per year) risk of a major cardiovascular event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in all-cause mortality, major vascular events and revascularisations were found with no excess of adverse events among people without evidence of CVD treated with statins.

Statin therapy and the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage: a meta-analysis of 31 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Statin therapy decreases the risk of ischemic stroke. An increased risk of intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) has been observed in some studies. To investigate this issue, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using statins that reported ICH.

METHODS

We performed a literature search of Medline, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library through January 25, 2012, and identified additional randomized controlled trials by reviewing reference lists of retrieved studies and prior meta-analyses. All randomized controlled trials of statin therapy that reported ICH or hemorrhagic stroke were included. The primary outcome variable was ICH. Thirty-one randomized controlled trials were included. All analyses used random effects models and heterogeneity was not observed in any of the analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 91,588 subjects were included in the active group and 91,215 in the control group. There was no significant difference in incidence of ICH observed in the active treatment group versus control (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.88-1.32; P=0.47). ICH risk was not related to the degree of low-density lipoprotein reduction or achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Total stroke (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.91; P<0.0001) and all-cause mortality (OR, 0.92; CI, 0.87-0.96; P=0.0007) were significantly reduced in the active therapy group. There was no evidence of publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Active statin therapy was not associated with significant increase in ICH in this meta-analysis of 31 randomized controlled trials of statin therapy. A significant reduction in all stroke and all-cause mortality was observed with statin therapy.

Statins and prevention of infections: systematic review and meta-analysis of data from large randomised placebo controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the potential of statins to lower the risk of infections as published in observational studies is causal.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised placebo controlled trials of statins (up to 10 March 2011) enrolling a minimum of 100 participants, with follow-up for at least one year.

DATA EXTRACTION

Infection or infection related death.

RESULTS

The first study selection yielded 632 trials. After screening of the corresponding abstracts and full text papers, 11 trials totalling 30 947 participants were included. 4655 of the participants (2368 assigned to statins and 2287 assigned to placebo) reported an infection during treatment. Meta-analysis showed no effect of statins on the risk of infections (relative risk 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.05) or on infection related deaths (0.97, 0.83 to 1.13).

CONCLUSION

These findings do not support the hypothesis that statins reduce the risk of infections. Absence of any evidence for a beneficial effect in large placebo controlled trials reduces the likelihood of a causal effect as reported in observational studies.

Pharmacological actions of statins: a critical appraisal in the management of cancer

Statins, among the most commonly prescribed drugs worldwide, are cholesterol-lowering agents used to manage and prevent cardiovascular and coronary heart diseases. Recently, a multifaceted action in different physiological and pathological conditions has been also proposed for statins, beyond anti-inflammation and neuroprotection. Statins have been shown to act through cholesterol-dependent and -independent mechanisms and are able to affect several tissue functions and modulate specific signal transduction pathways that could account for statin pleiotropic effects. Typically, statins are prescribed in middle-aged or elderly patients in a therapeutic regimen covering a long life span during which metabolic processes, aging, and concomitant novel diseases, including cancer, could occur. In this context, safety, toxicity, interaction with other drugs, and the state of health have to be taken into account in subjects treated with statins. Some evidence has shown a dichotomous effect of statins with either cancer-inhibiting or -promoting effects. To date, clinical trials failed to demonstrate a reduced cancer occurrence in statin users and no sufficient data are available to define the long-term effects of statin use over a period of 10 years. Moreover, results from clinical trials performed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of statins in cancer did not suggest statin use as chemotherapeutic or adjuvant agents. Here, we reviewed the pharmacology of the statins, providing a comprehensive update of the current knowledge of their effects on tissues, biological processes, and pathological conditions, and we dissected the disappointing evidence on the possible future use of statin-based drugs in cancer therapy.

Efficacy of statins for primary prevention in people at low cardiovascular risk: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Statins were initially used to improve cardiovascular outcomes in people with established coronary artery disease, but recently their use has become more common in people at low cardiovascular risk. We did a systematic review of randomized trials to assess the efficacy and harms of statins in these individuals.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (to Jan. 28, 2011), registries of health technology assessments and clinical trials, and reference lists of relevant reviews. We included trials that randomly assigned participants at low cardiovascular risk to receive a statin versus a placebo or no statin. We defined low risk as an observed 10-year risk of less than 20% for cardiovascular-related death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, but we explored other definitions in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 29 eligible trials involving a total of 80,711 participants. All-cause mortality was significantly lower among patients receiving a statin than among controls (relative risk [RR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.97) for trials with a 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease < 20% [primary analysis] and 0.83, 95% CI 0.73-0.94, for trials with 10-year risk < 10% [sensitivity analysis]). Patients in the statin group were also significantly less likely than controls to have nonfatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.84) and nonfatal stroke (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.96). Neither metaregression nor stratified analyses suggested statistically significant differences in efficacy between high-and low-potency statins, or larger reductions in cholesterol.

INTERPRETATION

Statins were found to be efficacious in preventing death and cardiovascular morbidity in people at low cardiovascular risk. Reductions in relative risk were similar to those seen in patients with a history of coronary artery disease.

Statins and intracerebral hemorrhage: collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A recent large, randomized trial suggested that statins may increase the risk of intracerebral hemorrhage. Accordingly, we systematically reviewed the association of statins with intracerebral hemorrhage in randomized and observational data.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We screened 17 electronic bibliographic databases to identify eligible studies and consulted with experts in the field. We used DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models to compute summary risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Randomized trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies were analyzed separately. Only adjusted risk estimates were used for pooling observational data. We included published and unpublished data from 23 randomized trials and 19 observational studies. The complete data set comprised 248 391 patients and 14 784 intracerebral hemorrhages. Statins were not associated with an increased risk of intracerebral hemorrhage in randomized trials (risk ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.41), cohort studies (risk ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.10), or case-control studies (risk ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.88). Substantial statistical heterogeneity was evident for the case-control studies (I(2)=66%, P=0.01), but not for the cohort studies (I(2)=0%, P=0.48) or randomized trials (I(2)=30%, P=0.09). Sensitivity analyses by study design features, patient characteristics, or magnitude of cholesterol lowering did not materially alter the results.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that statins were associated with intracerebral hemorrhage; if such a risk is present, its absolute magnitude is likely to be small and outweighed by the other cardiovascular benefits of these drugs.

An old friend in a new light: the role of osteocalcin in energy metabolism

Accumulating evidence suggests interactions between bone and energy metabolism, which may affect the risk of cardiovascular disease. Recent animal studies indicate that osteocalcin (OC) plays a key role in the coordinated regulation of glucose and insulin metabolism while insulin receptors on osteoblasts may regulate bone turnover and circulating OC levels. Association studies, weight loss interventions, and observational data lend some support to the existence and relevance of these mechanisms in humans. However, corroborating evidence from pharmacologic interventions in either bone or glucose metabolism is limited by the number, design, and complex pharmacological effects of the drugs used. Furthermore, such clinical trials are complicated by the alteration of metabolic feedback mechanisms in the insulin resistant state. Purpose-designed studies are needed to further establish the existence and significance of the role of OC and its subfractions in human insulin metabolism. In this review we summarize existing animal evidence regarding the role of OC and its subfractions in bone and energy metabolism and assess current clinical trial evidence relating to the significance and consequences of this relationship in humans.