Efficacy and Safety of Rosuvastatin Every Other Day Compared with Once Daily in Patients with Hypercholesterolemia

Management of Statin Intolerance in 2018: Still More Questions Than Answers

Statin therapy is generally well tolerated and very effective in the prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease, regardless of cholesterol levels; however, it can be associated with various adverse events (myalgia, myopathy, rhabdomyolysis, and diabetes mellitus, among others). Patients frequently discontinue statin therapy without medical advice because of perceived side effects and consequently increase their risk for cardiovascular events. In patients with statin intolerance, it may be advisable to change the dose, switch to a different statin, or try an alternate-day regimen. If intolerance is associated with all statins-even at the lowest dose-non-statin drugs and certain nutraceuticals can be considered. This review focuses on the definition of statin intolerance and on the development of clinical and therapeutic strategies for its management, including emerging alternative therapies.

Correlation of compliance to statin therapy with lipid profile and serum HMGCoA reductase levels in dyslipidemic patients

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of statin therapy may be lost or vary with reduction in compliance and intensity of statin therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To study and correlate the quantitative effect of compliance on lipid profile and 3-hydroxyl-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGCoA-R) levels in dyslipidemic patients.

METHODS

Compliance to different intensity of statin therapy assessed by pill count was correlated with serum levels of total cholesterol (TC), low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C), high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG), apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1), apolipoprotein B (ApoB) and HMGCoA-R.

RESULTS

Out of 200 patients, 160 received moderate intensity statin therapy whereas 40 were on high intensity statin therapy. The overall mean compliance of patients was 56.7%. The compliance of patients on moderate intensity statin therapy was higher (56.8%) than those on high intensity (56.4%) (p=0.92). There was significant inverse correlation (p<0.05) between compliance and TC, TG, LDL-C and HMGCoA-R levels and positive correlation (p<0.05) with HDL-C levels. The mean serum HMGCoA-R levels did not fall below 9-10ng/mL when compliance to either moderate or high intensity statin therapy was increased above 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

It is appropriate to improve the compliance to existing statin therapy than switching over to higher intensity statin therapy. Estimation of HMGCoA-R levels may be explored as a surrogate marker to monitor and assess the compliance of patients to statin therapy.

Biochemistry of Statins

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Elevated blood lipids may be a major risk factor for CVD. Due to consistent and robust association of higher low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol levels with CVD across experimental and epidemiologic studies, therapeutic strategies to decrease risk have focused on LDL-cholesterol reduction as the primary goal. Current medication options for lipid-lowering therapy include statins, bile acid sequestrants, a cholesterol-absorption inhibitor, fibrates, nicotinic acid, and omega-3 fatty acids, which all have various mechanisms of action and pharmacokinetic properties. The most widely prescribed lipid-lowering agents are the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, or statins. Since their introduction in the 1980s, statins have emerged as the one of the best-selling medication classes to date, with numerous trials demonstrating powerful efficacy in preventing cardiovascular outcomes (Kapur and Musunuru, 2008 [1]). The statins are commonly used in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and mixed hyperlipidemia. This chapter focuses on the biochemistry of statins including their structures, pharmacokinetics, and mechanism of actions as well as the potential adverse reactions linked to their clinical uses.

Non-traditional dosing of statins in statin-intolerant patients-is it worth a try?

In this manuscript, three manifestations of statin intolerance will be covered. The first, myopathy, is mostly subjective with variable complaints of myalgias often worsened by exercise, muscle cramping or weakness, and at times associated with a biomarker, elevations in creatine kinase (CK). A rare but serious manifestation can be rhabdomyolysis. The second, liver toxicity, is associated with reversible biochemical increases in transaminases and rarely other liver function tests. Finally, statin-related central nervous system (CNS) toxicity typically defined as cognitive impairment is quite rare and appears to be idiosyncratic. Statin dose alternatives will then be discussed and highlighted in the setting of the new cholesterol-lowering guidelines. Non-statin lipid-altering therapies as well as other alternative therapies will also be reviewed.

Lipid-lowering efficacy of rosuvastatin

BACKGROUND

Rosuvastatin is one of the most potent statins and is currently widely prescribed. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of rosuvastatin on blood lipids.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of rosuvastatin on serum total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, non-HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides in participants with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease. Secondary objectives To quantify the variability of the effect of various doses of rosuvastatin.To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in the randomized placebo-controlled trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 10 of 12, 2014 in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to October week 5 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 2014 week 44), Web of Science Core Collection (1970 to 5 November 2014) and BIOSIS Citation Index (1969 to 31 October 2014). No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of rosuvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included and extracted data. WDAEs information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials.

MAIN RESULTS

One-hundred and eight trials (18 placebo-controlled and 90 before-and-after) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of rosuvastatin in 19,596 participants. Rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg/day caused LDL-cholesterol decreases of 46% to 55%, when all the trials were combined using the generic inverse variance method. The quality of evidence for these effects is high. Log dose-response data over doses of 1 to 80 mg, revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol. When compared to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin was about three-fold more potent at reducing LDL-cholesterol. There was no dose-related effect of rosuvastatin on blood HDL-cholesterol, but overall, rosuvastatin increased HDL by 7%. There is a high risk of bias for the trials in this review, which would affect WDAEs, but unlikely to affect the lipid measurements. WDAEs were not statistically different between rosuvastatin and placebo in 10 of 18 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 0.84; 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.47).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The total blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of rosuvastatin was linearly dependent on dose. Rosuvastatin log dose-response data were linear over the commonly prescribed dose range. Based on an informal comparison with atorvastatin, this represents a three-fold greater potency. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with rosuvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 44% of the placebo-controlled trials.

Alternate-day dosing with statins

The duration of the cholesterol-lowering effect of statins is considerably longer than the duration of the pharmacokinetic half-life of these drugs. The long duration of pharmacologic effects provides the rational for the efficacy of intermittent dosing that provides nearly the equivalent low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction compared with daily dosing. Review of studies comparing alternate-day dosing with daily dosing of statins indicates that the magnitude of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction with alternate-day dosing is nearly the same, with obvious cost savings. It is possible that the adverse effects of statins, such as myalgia or diabetes, may be related to the cumulative amount of drug ingested over time, and if so, the adverse effects may be decreased by alternate-day dosing.

Non-every day statin administration--a literature review

BACKGROUND

Statins are the treatment of choice for lowering LDL-C levels and reducing cardiovascular events. They have a remarkable safety profile, although some patients do not tolerate them. The aim of the study was to summarize the existing data on non-every day statin administration regimens.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE databases to identify articles on non-every day statin administration, published between 1990 and January 2010. All publications regardless of methodology, design, size, or language were included. Data extracted included study design, duration and aims, type of statin, therapeutic regimen, patient characteristics, effectiveness, tolerability, and costs.

RESULTS

The 21 retrieved articles were characterized by small sample size, short follow up period, and a preponderance of males and "primary" prevention cases. Several lacked randomization or a control group. The heterogeneity of the study groups, medications, doses, design and aims precluded a pooled or meta-analysis. The most reported and effective regimens were atorvastatin and rosuvastatin on alternate days. These regimens, with or without other lipid lowering agents, were well tolerated even among subjects with previous statin intolerance, and produced meaningful cost savings. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of these regimens on cardiovascular events was not clarified.

CONCLUSIONS

Atorvastatin or rosuvastatin on alternate days might be considered for patients who are intolerant to statin therapy. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of these regimens on cardiovascular events.

Rosuvastatin: Extended-Interval Dosing

This Hospital Pharmacy feature is extracted from Off-Label Drug Pacts, a quarterly publication available from Wolters Kluwer Health. Off-Label Drug Pacts is a practitioner-oriented resource for information about specific drug uses that are unapproved by the US Food and Drug Administration. This new guide to the literature enables the health care professional or clinician to quickly identify published studies on off-label uses and determine if a specific use is rational in a patient care scenario. References direct the reader to the full literature for more comprehensive information before patient care decisions are made. Direct questions or comments regarding Off-Label Drug Uses to jgeneral@kumc.edu .

Efficacy and tolerability of once-weekly rosuvastatin in patients with previous statin intolerance

BACKGROUND

Many patients who could benefit from hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme-A reductase inhibitors (statins) are unable to take statins because of myalgias while taking previous statin therapy.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of once-weekly rosuvastatin in patients with documented myalgias on statins who were not currently taking a statin and not at low-density lipoprotein (LDL) goal.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study we enrolled a total of 17 Clement J. Zablocki Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care patients with a diagnosis of hyperlipidemia and a history of myalgias on statin therapy who were not currently on a statin and not at LDL goal. Two 8-week treatment phases consisted of rosuvastatin 5 mg once-weekly or matching placebo, with a dose titration to 10 mg once-weekly if not at LDL goal at week 4. The primary efficacy outcome was the difference in the mean percentage change in LDL from baseline between rosuvastatin and placebo.

RESULTS

A significant difference in the mean percentage change in LDL from baseline for rosuvastatin vs. placebo was identified (12.2% reduction vs. 0.4% reduction, respectively; P = .002). Two of the 17 patients (11.8%) in the placebo treatment phase and three of the 15 patients (20%) in the rosuvastatin treatment phase experienced myalgias requiring cessation of therapy. In addition, three patients (20%) were able to attain LDL goal on rosuvastatin compared with zero patients (0%) on placebo.

CONCLUSION

Once-weekly low-dose rosuvastatin is an effective and well-tolerated lipid-lowering therapy option for patients not at LDL goal and previously unable to tolerate statins because of a history of myalgias.

Treating statin-intolerant patients

Statins are effective in reducing cardiovascular events and are safe for almost all patients. Nevertheless, intolerance to statins is frequently faced in clinical practice. This is mostly due to muscular symptoms (myalgia with or without increase of plasma creatinine kinase) and/or elevation of hepatic aminotransferases, which overall constitutes approximately two-thirds of reported adverse events during statin therapy. These side effects raise concerns in patients as well as in doctors and are likely to reduce patients' adherence and, as a consequence, the cardiovascular benefit. Therefore, it is mandatory that clinicians improve their knowledge on the clinical aspects of muscular and hepatic side effects of statin therapy as well as their ability to manage patients with statin intolerance. Besides briefly examining the clinical aspects and the mechanisms that are proposed to be responsible for the most common statin-associated side effects, the main purpose of this article is to review the available approaches to manage statin-intolerant patients. The first step is to determine whether the adverse events are indeed related to statin therapy. If so, lowering the dosage or changing statin, alternate dosing options, or the use of nonstatin compounds may be practical strategies. The cholesterol-lowering potency as well as the usefulness of these different approaches in treating statin-intolerant patients will be examined based on currently available data. However, the cardiovascular benefit of these strategies has not been well established, so their use has to be guided by a careful clinical assessment of each patient.

Race differences: modeling the pharmacodynamics of rosuvastatin in Western and Asian hypercholesterolemia patients

AIM

To evaluate race differences in the pharmacodynamics of rosuvastatin in Western and Asian hypercholesterolemia patients using a population pharmacodynamic (PPD) model generated and validated using published clinical efficacy trials.

METHODS

Published studies randomized trials with rosuvastatin treatment for at least 4 weeks in hypercholesterolemia patients were used for model building and validation. Population pharmacodynamic analyses were performed to describe the dose-response relationship with the mean values of LDL-C reduction (%) from dose-ranging trials using NONMEM software. Baseline LDL-C and race were analyzed as the potential covariates. Model robustness was evaluated using the bootstrap method and the data-splitting method, and Monte Carlo simulation was performed to assess the predictive performance of the PPD model with the mean effects from the one-dose trials.

RESULTS

Of the 36 eligible trials, 14 dose-ranging trials were used in model development and 22 one-dose trials were used for model prediction. The dose-response of rosuvastatin was successfully described by a simple E(max) model with a fixed E(0), which provided a common E(max) and an approximate twofold difference in ED(50) for Westerners and Asians. The PPD model was demonstrated to be stable and predictive.

CONCLUSION

The race differences in the pharmacodynamics of rosuvastatin are consistent with those observed in the pharmacokinetics of the drug, confirming that there is no significant difference in the exposure-response relationship for LDL-C reduction between Westerners and Asians. The study suggests that for a new compound with a mechanism of action similar to that of rosuvastatin, its efficacy in Western populations plus its pharmacokinetics in bridging studies in Asian populations may be used to support a registration of the new compound in Asian countries.

Alternate-Day Statin Therapy for the Treatment of Hyperlipidemia

Objective:

To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and cost of alternate-day statin therapy in the treatment of hyperlipidemia.

Data Sources:

Systematic searches were conducted for primary literature sources involving alternative statin regimens using PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (January 1966-March 2010). Articles selected were limited to those published in the English language. Reference citations from relevant publications identified were also reviewed.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

All English-language articles identified were reviewed and 17 trials (14 prospective and 3 retrospective) involving alternate-day statin dosing were included. Studies involving alternative statin dosing regimens other than alternating days were excluded from this review.

Data Synthesis:

Daily administration of statins is the standard of therapy used to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels as well as atherosclerosis that may lead to coronary events. Through LDL-C lowering and pleiotrope effects, statins decrease cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, due to cost and adverse effects of statins, some patients are nonadherent to statin therapy. Several small studies have found alternate-day statin therapy to be as effective at reducing LDL-C as daily administration, while also lowering the incidence of adverse reactions and potentially lowering cost.

Conclusions:

Alternate-day statin therapy may decrease cost and therapy-limiting adverse reactions while potentially increasing regimen adherence and positively affecting the lipid panel. Further research is needed to determine whether this alternative regimen produces similar cardiovascular outcomes as those with daily statin therapy,

Efficacy of combination drug pulse therapy in maintaining lipid levels in patients intolerant of daily statin use

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of combination drug pulse therapy in maintaining lipid levels in patients intolerant of a daily dose of statins. Twenty-three patients, previously receiving aggressive statin therapy, were treated twice weekly with rosuvastatin or atorvastatin in different dosages along with ezetimibe as well as daily doses of bile acid sequestrant for a mean period of 4.5 months. The recommended National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III goals had already been achieved in 78% of patients (n=18) before starting combination pulse therapy. This combination therapy significantly increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol values by 5.82% (t=2.138, P=.044), while the increases in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglyceride, and apolipoprotein B levels compared with baseline were not statistically significant. Overall, 3 of 23 patients (13%) discontinued the combination therapy because of muscle-related symptoms over a mean course of 4.5 months of treatment.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Low-Dose Pitavastatin Versus Atorvastatin in Patients with Hypercholesterolemia

Background:

Previous studies have shown conflicting results on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction for comparable doses of pitsvastatin and atorvastatin.

Objective:

To compare the efficacy of pitavastatin 1 mg once daily with that of atorvastatin 10 mg once daily on lipoprotein change, safety, and cost per percent LDL-C reduction.

Methods:

An 8-week, randomized, open-label, parallel trial was conducted in patients with hypercholesterolemia. One hundred patients were equally randomized to receive pitavastatin 1 mg once daily or atorvastatin 10 mg once daily; 98 completed the study. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and at the end of the study.

Results:

Pitavastatin lowered LDL-C levels from baseline by 37% compared with 46% in the atorvastatin group (p < 0.001). The reduction of total cholesterol (TC) levels from baseline was significantly different between the pitavastatin (28%) and atorvastatin (32%) groups (p = 0.005). There was no significant difference in the percentage of changes in triglyceride and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels between groups. The percentage of patients who achieved LDL-C goals according to National Cholesterol Education Program–Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines was not significantly different between the pitavastatin (74%) and atorvastatin (84%) groups (p = 0.220). In addition, both regimens were well tolerated, with no patient developing an elevation of more than 3 times the upper normal limit of alanine aminotransferase or 10 times that of creatine kinase. The monthly cost per percent LDL-C reduction in the pitavastatin group ($0.77) was about 50% lower than the cost in the atorvastatin ($1.56) group.

Conclusions:

Although pitavastatin 1 mg daily was not as effective at lowering LDL-C and TC levels as atorvastatin 10 mg daily, the number of patients achieving their LDL-C goals with pitavastatin was comparable with the number using atorvastatin. Pitavastatin 1 mg once daily may be an alternative regimen with cost-saving benefits but without a significant decrease in therapeutic benefit or increase in adverse events in patients with hypercholesterolemia.

Efficacy of rosuvastatin (5 mg and 10 mg) twice a week in patients intolerant to daily statins

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of rosuvastatin twice weekly in 40 patients intolerant to daily statins. Rosuvastatin twice weekly alone or added to other lipid-lowering medications decreased total cholesterol by 19%, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 26%, and triglycerides by 14% (p<0.01 for all). High-density lipoprotein cholesterol did not change. Eight of the 40 patients (20%) discontinued twice-weekly rosuvastatin treatment because of muscle-related symptoms, during an average of 8 weeks of treatment. In conclusion, rosuvastatin twice weekly reduced total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides and was well tolerated, but determining long-term tolerability requires more prolonged treatment.

Effectiveness and tolerability of every-other-day rosuvastatin dosing in patients with prior statin intolerance

BACKGROUND

Statins are generally well tolerated, but some patients discontinue therapy secondary to adverse effects. Dosing a statin (rosuvastatin) every other day (EOD) may provide significant lipoprotein changes while avoiding common adverse effects in this statin-intolerant population.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect and tolerance of EOD rosuvastatin in patients previously intolerant to statin therapy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients treated with EOD rosuvastatin at 2 lipid specialty clinics: the University of Kansas Lipid, Atherosclerosis, and LDL-Apheresis Center and the Hartford Hospital Cholesterol Management Center. Approximately 2600 charts were reviewed to identify patients receiving rosuvastatin EOD who previously had experienced statin intolerance. Fifty-one patients were eligible for the analysis, which evaluated changes in the lipid profile, the number achieving their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals, and the percent tolerating rosuvastatin EOD. Laboratory data were assessed immediately prior to rosuvastatin EOD therapy and at the first follow-up.

RESULTS

Myalgias (76.5%) and increased transaminase levels (19.5%) were the most common causes of prior statin intolerance, but 72.5% (37/51) of patients were able to tolerate the EOD therapy (mean dose 5.6 mg) regimen for 4 +/- 2.9 (mean +/- SD) months. Mean LDL-C decreased 34.5% (p < 0.001) in the patients who tolerated the regimen, enabling approximately 50% to achieve their LDL-C goal. All patients who were considered to be intolerant to rosuvastatin EOD therapy (27.5%; 14/51) re-experienced the symptoms of their prior statin intolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

Treating patients intolerant to statins with rosuvastatin EOD was tolerated by the majority of patients and reduced LDL-C in our study. This dosing strategy may be useful in patients intolerant to once-daily statin dosing, although such an approach has not been documented to reduce cardiovascular events.

Effectiveness of ezetimibe alone or in combination with twice a week Atorvastatin (10 mg) for statin intolerant high-risk patients

This study was undertaken to investigate the effect of ezetimibe (10 mg/day) alone or in combination with atorvastatin (10 mg twice a week) on hypercholesterolemia in 56 high-risk patients intolerant to daily statin use. Ezetimibe monotherapy was well tolerated (2 withdrawals) and induced a mean reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol of 20% (p <0.05) at the third month. However, of the 54 patients still taking ezetimibe, only 5 (9%) were at their LDL cholesterol targets. Atorvastatin 10 mg twice a week was then added to ezetimibe and was well tolerated (3 withdrawals). This combination reduced LDL cholesterol (in a treatment-based analysis) by 37% compared with baseline (p <0.001), with 43 (84%) patients reaching their LDL cholesterol goals. When patients (n = 34, 25 men) with baseline serum creatinine values in the upper 2 tertiles were analyzed separately, there was a significant (p = 0.041) decrease in serum creatinine levels after 6 months of treatment. In conclusion, the combination of ezetimibe plus atorvastatin 10 mg twice a week might be a therapeutic option for high-risk patients intolerant to daily statin monotherapy.