Rosuvastatin safety: lessons from the FDA review and post-approval surveillance

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

Ribociclib may potentiate rosuvastatin effect in causing late onset rhabdomyolysis

A woman in her 50s with metastatic hormone receptor positive breast cancer developed rhabdomyolysis and subsequent acute kidney injury while on a combination of ribociclib and rosuvastatin therapy. She had been taking both medications long term and had recently recommenced her ribociclib at her usual dose after a routine 1 week break. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors have been implicated in causing rhabdomyolysis by potentiating statin effect by way of inhibition of cytochrome P450 enzymatic action and decreasing hepatic membrane transporter function. This is the first case in which the combination of ribociclib and rosuvastatin has been shown to cause this adverse effect. It is also one of the first to demonstrate this effect occurring years after commencement of therapy. Continued vigilance for this side effect should be maintained long term.

Evaluation of rosuvastatin-induced QT prolongation risk using real-world data, in vitro cardiomyocyte studies, and mortality assessment

Drug-induced QT prolongation is attributed to several mechanisms, including hERG channel blockage. However, the risks, mechanisms, and the effects of rosuvastatin-induced QT prolongation remain unclear. Therefore, this study assessed the risk of rosuvastatin-induced QT prolongation using (1) real-world data with two different settings, namely case-control and retrospective cohort study designs; (2) laboratory experiments using human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hiPSC-CM); (3) nationwide claim data for mortality risk evaluation. Real-world data showed an association between QT prolongation and the use of rosuvastatin (OR [95% CI], 1.30 [1.21-1.39]) but not for atorvastatin (OR [95% CI], 0.98 [0.89-1.07]). Rosuvastatin also affected the sodium and calcium channel activities of cardiomyocytes in vitro. However, rosuvastatin exposure was not associated with a high risk of all-cause mortality (HR [95% CI], 0.95 [0.89-1.01]). Overall, these results suggest that rosuvastatin use increased the risk of QT prolongation in real-world settings, significantly affecting the action potential of hiPSC-CMs in laboratory settings. Long-term rosuvastatin treatment was not associated with mortality. In conclusion, while our study links rosuvastatin use to potential QT prolongation and possible influence on the action potential of hiPSC-CMs, long-term use does not show increased mortality, necessitating further research for conclusive real-world applications.

Pharmacokinetic Interactions and Tolerability of Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe: A Randomized, Phase 1, Crossover Study in Healthy Chinese Participants

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe has promising clinical benefits with a significant safety and tolerability profile. However, there is a lack of clinical data supporting the drug-drug interaction (DDI) in Chinese population. Thus, the aim of this study is to assess the potential pharmacokinetic DDI between rosuvastatin and ezetimibe in a Chinese population.

METHODS

In this randomized, open-label, phase 1 study, 12 healthy volunteers were randomized to three treatment groups: 10 mg rosuvastatin plus 10 mg ezetimibe, 10 mg rosuvastatin alone, and 10 mg ezetimibe alone under fasting conditions. The plasma concentrations of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe were determined, and the pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated. Primary endpoints were peak plasma concentration (C_max), area under the curve from zero to last measurement (AUC_0-t), and area under the curve from zero to infinity (AUC_0-∞) that were log-transformed, and co-administration was compared with monotherapy to evaluate the DDI.

RESULTS

The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of rosuvastatin with 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were 0.94 (0.80-1.12) for C_max, 0.96 (0.85-1.08) for AUC_0-t, and 0.96 (0.86-1.07) for AUC_0-∞ when administered in combination with ezetimibe versus administered alone. The GMRs of unconjugated ezetimibe and total ezetimibe with 90% CIs were 1.15 (1.00-1.32) and 0.93 (0.80-1.07) for C_max, 0.96 (0.84-1.10) and 0.95 (0.83-1.08) for AUC_0-t, and 1.06 (0.96-1.18) and 0.94 (0.80-1.11) for AUC_0-∞, respectively, when administered in combination with rosuvastatin versus administered alone.

CONCLUSION

Co-administration of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe showed no clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions in a healthy Chinese population.

Progress of potential drugs targeted in lipid metabolism research

Lipids are a class of complex hydrophobic molecules derived from fatty acids that not only form the structural basis of biological membranes but also regulate metabolism and maintain energy balance. The role of lipids in obesity and other metabolic diseases has recently received much attention, making lipid metabolism one of the attractive research areas. Several metabolic diseases are linked to lipid metabolism, including diabetes, obesity, and atherosclerosis. Additionally, lipid metabolism contributes to the rapid growth of cancer cells as abnormal lipid synthesis or uptake enhances the growth of cancer cells. This review introduces the potential drug targets in lipid metabolism and summarizes the important potential drug targets with recent research progress on the corresponding small molecule inhibitor drugs. The significance of this review is to provide a reference for the clinical treatment of metabolic diseases related to lipid metabolism and the treatment of tumors, hoping to deepen the understanding of lipid metabolism and health.

Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Two Formulations of Rosuvastatin Following Single-dose Administration in Healthy Chinese Subjects Under Fasted and Fed Conditions

The main objective of the study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two rosuvastatin calcium tablets in healthy Chinese subjects under fasted and fed conditions. The study was carried out using a randomized, open-label, two-formulation, two-sequence, two-period, single-dose crossover design, with a washout period of 7 days. Both the fasted study and fed study enrolled 28 subjects. In each study period, the subjects were administrated a single oral dose of the test product or reference product of rosuvastatin 10 mg. Blood samples were collected from pre-dose to 72 hours after administration with 16 time points in total. Bioequivalence evaluation was performed using ln-transformed pharmacokinetic parameters of rosuvastatin, including C_max , AUC_0-t , and AUC_0-∞ . In the present study, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of test/reference geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of C_max , AUC_0-t , and AUC_0-∞ under the fasted and fed conditions were all within the acceptance range of 80%-125%. Additionally, only one subject experienced one adverse event (AE). High-fat meals reduced the C_max , AUC_0-t , and AUC_0-∞ , but had no significant effects on the λz, t_1/2 , or T_max of rosuvastatin. In the current study, the test product was bioequivalent to the reference product, and a single dose of rosuvastatin (10 mg) was well-tolerated. Food decreased the systemic exposure of rosuvastatin without the effects on the T_max or elimination rate.

Personalized medicine in lipid-modifying therapy

The choice of lipid-modifying treatment is largely based on the absolute level of cardiovascular risk and baseline lipid profile. Statins are the first-line treatment for most patients requiring reduction of low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors can be added to reach LDL-C targets. Statins have some adverse effects that are somewhat predictable based on phenotypic and genetic factors. Fibrates or omega-3 fatty acids can be added if triglyceride levels remain elevated. The RNA-targeted therapeutics in development offer the possibility of selective liver targeting for specific lipoproteins such as lipoprotein(a) and long-term reduction of LDL-C with infrequent administration of a small-interfering RNA may help to overcome the problem of adherence to therapy.

Combined use of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe improves hepatic steatosis in patients with dyslipidemia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe are beneficial for the management of dyslipidemia. We investigated whether rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe improves hepatic steatosis in patients with dyslipidemia.

METHODS

Between January and August 2018, 114 patients with dyslipidemia treated for 6 months with rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe were analyzed in this retrospective cohort study. The degree of hepatic steatosis was assessed using the hepatic steatosis index (HSI). Hepatic steatosis improvement and presence of fatty liver were defined as a ≥5% reduction in HSI score and HSI ≥36, respectively.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study population (50 males and 64 females) was 57.4 years. At baseline, the mean BMI total cholesterol level, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, triglyceride level, and HSI were 25.1 kg/m, 207.4 mg/dL, 126.1 mg/dL, 52.9 mg/dL, 146.4 mg/dL, and 36.1, respectively. During the 6-month treatment, hepatic steatosis burden was constant (mean HSI = 36.3 and 36.4 at 3 and 6 months, respectively). On multivariate analyses, ultrasonographic fatty liver and HSI ≥36 were selected as independent predictors of hepatic steatosis improvement. However, when 53 (46.5%) patients with fatty liver (HSI ≥ 36) were selected, hepatic steatosis burden was significantly improved (mean HSI = 40.8, 39.3, and 39.7 at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of rosuvastatin plus ezetimibe for the management of dyslipidemia did not improve hepatic steatosis burden in all patients with dyslipidemia, but it improved hepatic steatosis burden in the subgroup with fatty liver.

Independent risk factors for simvastatin-related myopathy and relevance to different types of muscle symptom

AIMS

Statins are widely used to prevent cardiovascular events, but little is known about the impact of different risk factors for statin-related myopathy or their relevance to reports of other types of muscle symptom.

METHODS AND RESULTS

An observational analysis was undertaken of 171 clinically adjudicated cases of myopathy (defined as unexplained muscle pain or weakness with creatine kinase >10× upper limit of normal) and, separately, of 15 208 cases of other muscle symptoms among 58 390 individuals with vascular disease treated with simvastatin for a mean of 3.4 years. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify independent predictors of myopathy. The rate of myopathy was low: 9 per 10 000 person-years of simvastatin therapy. Independent risk factors for myopathy included: simvastatin dose, ethnicity, sex, age, body mass index, medically treated diabetes, concomitant use of niacin-laropiprant, verapamil, beta-blockers, diltiazem and diuretics. In combination, these risk factors predicted more than a 30-fold risk difference between the top and bottom thirds of a myopathy risk score (hazard ratio : 34.35, 95% CI: 12.73-92.69, P across thirds = 9·1 × 10-48). However, despite the strong association with myopathy, this score was not associated with the other reported muscle symptoms (P across thirds = 0.93). Likewise, although SLCO1B1 genotype was associated with myopathy, it was not associated with other muscle symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The absolute risk of simvastatin-related myopathy is low, but individuals at higher risk can be identified to help guide patient management. The lack of association of the myopathy risk score with other muscle symptoms reinforces randomized placebo-controlled evidence that statins do not cause the vast majority of reported muscle symptoms.

High-Content Assay Multiplexing for Muscle Toxicity Screening in Human-Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Skeletal Myoblasts

Skeletal muscle-associated toxicity is an underresearched area in the field of high-throughput toxicity screening; hence, the potential adverse effects of drugs and chemicals on skeletal muscle are largely unknown. Novel organotypic microphysiological in vitro models are being developed to replicate the contractile function of skeletal muscle; however, the throughput and a need for specialized equipment may limit the utility of these tissue chip models for screening. In addition, recent developments in stem cell biology have resulted in the generation of induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived skeletal myoblasts that enable high-throughput in vitro screening. This study set out to develop a high-throughput multiplexed assay using iPSC-derived skeletal myoblasts that can be used as a first-pass screen to assess the potential for chemicals to affect skeletal muscle. We found that cytotoxicity and cytoskeletal integrity are most useful and reproducible assays for the skeletal myoblasts when evaluating overall cellular health or gauging disruptions in actin polymerization following 24 h of exposure. Both assays are based on high-content imaging and quantitative image processing to derive quantitative phenotypes. Both assays showed good to excellent assay robustness and reproducibility measured by interplate and interday replicability, coefficients of variation of negative controls, and Z'-factors for positive control chemicals. Concentration response assessment of muscle-related toxicants showed specificity of the observed effects compared to the general cytotoxicity. Overall, this study establishes a high-throughput multiplexed assay using skeletal myoblasts that may be used for screening and prioritization of chemicals for more complex tissue chip-based and in vivo evaluation.

Adverse effects of statin therapy: perception vs. the evidence - focus on glucose homeostasis, cognitive, renal and hepatic function, haemorrhagic stroke and cataract

Aims

To objectively appraise evidence for possible adverse effects of long-term statin therapy on glucose homeostasis, cognitive, renal and hepatic function, and risk for haemorrhagic stroke or cataract.

Methods and results

A literature search covering 2000-2017 was performed. The Panel critically appraised the data and agreed by consensus on the categorization of reported adverse effects. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and genetic studies show that statin therapy is associated with a modest increase in the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus (about one per thousand patient-years), generally defined by laboratory findings (glycated haemoglobin ≥6.5); this risk is significantly higher in the metabolic syndrome or prediabetes. Statin treatment does not adversely affect cognitive function, even at very low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and is not associated with clinically significant deterioration of renal function, or development of cataract. Transient increases in liver enzymes occur in 0.5-2% of patients taking statins but are not clinically relevant; idiosyncratic liver injury due to statins is very rare and causality difficult to prove. The evidence base does not support an increased risk of haemorrhagic stroke in individuals without cerebrovascular disease; a small increase in risk was suggested by the Stroke Prevention by Aggressive Reduction of Cholesterol Levels study in subjects with prior stroke but has not been confirmed in the substantive evidence base of RCTs, cohort studies and case-control studies.

Conclusion

Long-term statin treatment is remarkably safe with a low risk of clinically relevant adverse effects as defined above; statin-associated muscle symptoms were discussed in a previous Consensus Statement. Importantly, the established cardiovascular benefits of statin therapy far outweigh the risk of adverse effects.

Alirocumab for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia

INTRODUCTION

Alirocumab is a human monoclonal antibody inhibiting proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) that is administered by subcutaneous injection every 2 weeks. Area covered: Herein, the authors discuss the background to inhibition of PCSK9 and the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and clinical trials with alirocumab. Alirocumab produces substantial reductions in low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with and without background statin treatment. The safety profile appears very promising from the relatively short term studies that have been completed but there are some remaining concerns about long term risks of neurocognitive events and developing diabetes. Expert opinion: The profound reduction in LDL-C with alirocumab is most likely to translate into cardiovascular benefits in the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial and is unlikely in itself to result in any major adverse effects. The high cost and the current lack of long-term safety and efficacy data will restrict the use of alirocumab to patients who have high cardiovascular risk from established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia and who are unable to achieve LDL-C targets with maximally tolerated dose of statins with or without other lipid-lowering drugs. When further data become available, these indications are likely to be expanded.

A generalised sensation of coldness following introduction of rosuvastatin therapy

Rosuvastatin is the most potent 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitor commercially available to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Rosuvastatin has been associated with several adverse effects, including rhabdomyolysis and arthralgias. Here, we report an unusual adverse effect occurring on treatment with rosuvastatin, a 'continuous sensation of coldness'. A 60-year-old man began experiencing this peculiar feeling shortly after introduction of rosuvastatin treatment. The gentleman had to wear extra pair of socks and cover himself with blankets while reading, even during summer with surrounding temperature above 30°C. The abnormal sensation persisted for the 26 months during which he was treated with rosuvastatin, and disappeared within a week after discontinuing treatment. Physical examination, including thorough neurological examination, was entirely normal, as were haematological and biochemical parameters. While the pathophysiology of this phenomenon remains unknown, we hope that this case will encourage others to report similar symptomatology, perhaps enabling to gain more insight on the condition.

A reappraisal of the risks and benefits of treating to target with cholesterol lowering drugs

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one cause of death globally, and lipid modification, particularly lowering of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc), is one of the cornerstones of prevention and treatment. However, even after lowering of LDLc to conventional goals, a sizeable number of patients continue to suffer cardiovascular events. More aggressive lowering of LDLc and optimization of other lipid parameters like triglycerides (TG) and high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLc) have been proposed as two potential strategies to address this residual risk. These strategies entail use of maximal doses of highly potent HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and combination therapy with other lipid modifying agents. Though statins in general are fairly well tolerated, adverse events like myopathy are dose related. There are further risks with combination therapy. In this article, we review the adverse effects of lipid modifying agents used alone and in combination and weigh these effects against the evidence demonstrating their efficacy in reducing cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, and all cause mortality. For patients with established CVD, statins are the only group of drugs that have shown consistent reductions in hard outcomes. Though more aggressive lipid lowering with high dose potent statins can reduce rates of non fatal events and need for interventions, the incremental mortality benefits remain unclear, and their use is associated with a higher rate of drug related adverse effects. Myopathy and renal events have been a significant concern with the use of high potency statin drugs, in particular simvastatin and rosuvastatin. For patients who have not reached target LDL levels or have residual lipid abnormalities on maximal doses of statins, the addition of other agents has not been shown to improve clinical outcomes and carries an increased risk of adverse events. The clinical benefits of drugs to raise HDLc remain unproven. In patients without known cardiovascular disease, there is conflicting evidence as to the benefits of aggressive pursuit of numerical lipid targets, particularly with respect to all cause mortality. Certainly, in statin intolerant patients, alternative agents with a low side effect profile are desirable. Bile acid sequestrants are an effective and safe choice for decreasing LDLc, and omega-3 fatty acids are safe agents to decrease TG. There remains an obvious need to design and carry out large scale studies to help determine which agents, when combined with statins, have the greatest benefit on cardiovascular disease with the least added risk. These studies should be designed to assess the impact on clinical outcomes rather than surrogate endpoints, and require a comprehensive assessment and reporting of safety outcomes.

Managing hypercholesterolemia and preventing cardiovascular events in elderly and younger Chinese adults: focus on rosuvastatin

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death worldwide. The efficacy and safety of statins in primary and secondary prevention of CHD is confirmed in several large studies, and rosuvastatin is the latest statin on market. We review the published literature on rosuvastatin in Chinese people. The pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin in Chinese is somewhat different from that in Caucasians, but this does not influence the linear relationship between dosage and efficacy and with no drug accumulation. Rosuvastatin 5–20 mg/day is effective and safe in decreasing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in both younger and elderly patients with hypercholesterolemia, even in very elderly patients. Rosuvastatin also shows anti-inflammatory and antiatherosclerosis features, such as reducing carotid intima-media thickness and plaque area. Rosuvastatin can also improve the prognosis of Chinese CHD patients, such as in the case of acute myocardial infarction. Its adverse-event rate is low and comparable to other statins. In conclusion, rosuvastatin is effective and safe for younger or elderly Chinese patients.

Rosuvastatin Increases α-1 Microglobulin Urinary Excretion in Patients With Primary Dyslipidemia

The renoprotective effect of statins has been recently disputed because of observations of proteinuria associated with rosuvastatin treatment, the newest drug of the class. Statin-induced proteinuria findings were mainly based on crudely quantitative dipstick assays. The authors quantitatively evaluated the effect of rosuvastatin at the recommended starting dose of 10 mg/d, on urine protein excretion in patients with primary dyslipidemia. Serum lipid and nonlipid parameters as well as urinary electrolyte, creatinine, and protein (total, albumin, immunoglobulin G, and alpha-1 microglobulin) levels were measured in 40 patients treated with rosuvastatin and 30 controls at baseline and after 12 weeks. The protein-to-creatinine ratios were used to assess urinary protein excretion. Rosuvastatin improved the lipid profile, produced no deterioration of kidney function, but induced a small but significant increase in the excretion of alpha-1 microglobulin (by 16%, P < .05) indicating that statin-related proteinuria involves low-molecular-weight proteins and is of proximal tubular origin.

[Current views on lipid metabolism: statin-induced myopathy]

Cardiovascular diseases are the most common causes of death in Germany and the prevalence is increased in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Statins are often employed for primary and secondary prophylaxis of cardiovascular events but can potentially induce myopathy as a side-effect. In addition to an asymptomatic elevation of muscle enzymes, myalgia and myositis as well as rhabdomyolysis, the most severe side-effect, have been observed, which are mostly manifested within 6 months after initiation of therapy. Statin-induced myopathy is rare but if risk factors are present, the individual risk can be much higher. Such factors are in particular interaction with other medications, statin dosage, the characteristics of the statin preparation used, comorbidities, age and sex of the patient. Regular testing of muscle enzymes after induction of statin therapy is not generally recommended for asymptomatic patients, but is indispensable when muscle symptoms appear. Statin therapy must be immediately terminated and a diagnostic evaluation must be carried out at the latest when creatine kinase values show a more than 10-fold increase.

Statin-associated muscle-related adverse effects: a case series of 354 patients

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To characterize the properties and natural history of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor (statin)-associated muscle-related adverse effects (MAEs).

DESIGN

Patient-targeted postmarketing adverse-effect surveillance approach coupling survey design with an open-ended narrative.

SETTING

University-affiliated health care system.

SUBJECTS

Three hundred fifty-four patients (age range 34-86 yrs) who self-reported muscle-related problems associated with statin therapy.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Patients with perceived statin-associated MAEs completed a survey assessing statin drugs and dosages; characteristics of the MAEs; time course of onset, resolution, or recurrence; and impact on quality of life (QOL). Cases were assessed for putative drug adverse-effect causality by using the Naranjo adverse drug reaction probability scale criteria and were evaluated for inclusion in groups for which mortality benefit with statins has been shown. Patients reported muscle pain (93%), fatigue (88%), and weakness (85%). Three hundred patients (85%) met literature criteria for probable or definite drug adverse-effect causality. Ninety-four percent of atorvastatin usages (240/255) generated MAEs versus 61% of lovastatin usages (38/62, p<0.0001). Higher potency statins reproduced MAEs in 100% of 39 rechallenges versus 73% (29/40) with lower potency rechallenges (p<0.01). Time course of onset after statin initiation varied (median 14 wks); some MAEs occurred after long-term symptom-free use. Recurrence with rechallenge had a significantly shorter latency to onset (median 2 wks). The MAEs adversely affected all assessed functional and QOL domains. Most patients with probable or definite MAEs were in categories for which available randomized controlled trial evidence shows no trend to all-cause mortality benefit with statin therapy.

CONCLUSION

This study complements available information on the properties and natural history of statin-associated MAEs, affirming dose dependence and strong QOL impact. The data indicating a dose-dependent relationship between MAE risk and recurrence suggest lower potency statins or discontinuation may bear consideration for ameliorating symptoms.

Biliary efflux transporters involved in the clearance of rosuvastatin in sandwich culture of primary rat hepatocytes

Rosuvastatin (a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor) has been shown to be excreted mostly unchanged into the bile; interactions on the level of hepatic apical efflux transporters may represent a risk of liver toxicity. So far, controversial and insufficient data are available concerning transporters involved in the elimination process. This study was designed to elucidate, which transporters take part in the biliary clearance of rosuvastatin using sandwich-cultured primary rat hepatocytes. The canalicular efflux of rosuvastatin was measured in the presence of inhibitors: Ko 134, mitoxanthrone, novobiocin for breast cancer resistance protein (Bcrp); verapamil for multidrug resistance protein (Mdr1); benzbromarone, sulfasalazine, probenecid for multidrug resistance associated protein (Mrp 2); and cyclosporine A, glibenclamide, troglitazone for bile salt export pump (Bsep). Mrp2 inhibitors decreased the biliary efflux of rosuvastatin most potently by 78.9%, 35%, 54.1%; benzbromarone, probenecid, sulfasalazine, respectively, while Bcrp and Bsep inhibitors showed much less effect (29.1%, 23.0% ,30.0%; Ko 134, mitoxanthrone, novobiocin, respectively, and 32.6%, 29.3%, 20.6%, glibenclamide, cyclosporine A, troglitazone, respectively). The marked decline of canalicular transport by Mrp2 inhibitors suggests major role of Mrp2 in this process; however, Bcrp and Bsep might also contribute to the biliary elimination of rosuvatatin in sandwich-cultured rat hepatocytes.

Use of an electronic medical record to characterize cases of intermediate statin-induced muscle toxicity

Statin use can be accompanied by a variety of musculoskeletal complaints. The authors describe the clinical characteristics of case patients who experienced adverse statin-induced musculoskeletal symptoms within a large population-based cohort in Central Wisconsin. Case status was determined based on elevated serum creatine kinase (CK) levels and the presence of at least 1 physician note reflecting an increased index of suspicion for statin intolerance. From the medical records of nearly 2 million unique patients, the authors identified more than 20,000 potential study patients ( approximately 1%) having CK data and at least 1 exposure to a statin drug. Manual screening was completed on 2227 patients with CK levels in the upper 10th percentile. Of those screened, 267 met inclusion criteria (12.0% eligibility) and 218 agreed to participate in a retrospective study characterizing the risk determinants of statin-induced muscle toxicity. Three categoric pain variables were graded retrospectively (distribution, location, and severity of pain). The presenting complaints of the case patients were extremely heterogeneous. The number of patients with a compelling pain syndrome (diffuse, proximal muscle pain of high intensity) increased at higher serum CK levels; the number of patients with indeterminate pain variables decreased at higher serum CK levels. The lines reflecting these relationships cross at a CK level of approximately 1175 U/L, approximately half the threshold level needed to make a clinical diagnosis of "myopathy" (ie, CK >10-fold the upper limit of normal).

Jupiter to earth: a statin helps people with normal LDL-C and high hs-CRP, but what does it mean?

The JUPITER trial (Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin) (N Engl J Med 2008; 359:2195-2207) compared rosuvastatin (Crestor) 20 mg daily vs placebo in apparently healthy people who had levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lower than 130 mg/dL but elevated levels (>or= 2 mg/L) of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP). Rosuvastatin treatment lowered LDL-C levels by 50% and hs-CRP levels by 37%, accompanied by a 44% relative risk reduction in the composite end point of unstable angina, revascularization, and confirmed death from cardiovascular causes. In absolute terms, 95 people had to be treated over 2 years to prevent one event. There was, however, a higher incidence of diabetes in the rosuvastatin group.

The Role of Statin Drugs in the Management of the Peripheral Vascular Patient

The impact of statin therapy on established vascular conditions and recurrent disease is most relevant for long-term care. Patients receiving statin therapy have been shown to experience less recurrent stenosis following carotid endarterectomy and stent angioplasty, reduced cardiac events following cardiac and noncardiac vascular surgery, and reduction in aneurysm development. In patients with peripheral arterial disease, claudication distance is increased, as well as patency rates following infrainguinal arterial bypass grafting. Of note, statins drugs may also prove beneficial in the prevention of certain cancers, Alzheimer's disease, and osteoporosis (all diseases frequently seen concurrently in the patient with peripheral arterial disease). As such, it is becoming all the more necessary that vascular surgeons remain informed about clinical research initiatives related to statin use and lipid management in general. The following is a review of lipid metabolism as it applies to statins as well as a review of the beneficial effects of statins.

Rosuvastatin in elderly patients

A progressive accumulation of atherosclerotic lesions beginning early in life puts elderly persons at a greater absolute risk of cardiovascular disease and coronary events than other segments of the population. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) therapy has been shown to be both efficacious and well tolerated in most elderly patients. Among the statins, rosuvastatin has advantages in treating older patients: at low starting doses it is very efficacious compared with other statins, and thus more likely to enable patients to reach their low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol goals without the need for titration or combination therapy. Lack of clinically significant interactions with most drugs metabolised by cytochrome P450 enzyme 3A4 may also make rosuvastatin safer for patients taking multiple medications. Furthermore, rosuvastatin has shown efficacy in treating patients with many of the co-morbidities common in the elderly, including renal impairment and diabetes mellitus. As yet, however, cardiovascular endpoint data for rosuvastatin are not available.

Identifying genetic risk factors for serious adverse drug reactions: current progress and challenges

Serious adverse drug reactions (SADRs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Some SADRs may be predictable, based upon a drug's pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. Many, however, appear to be idiosyncratic. Genetic factors may underlie susceptibility to SADRs and the identification of predisposing genotypes may improve patient management through the prospective selection of appropriate candidates. Here we discuss three specific SADRs with an emphasis on genetic risk factors. These SADRs, selected based on wide-sweeping clinical interest, are drug-induced liver injury, statin-induced myotoxicity and drug-induced long QT and torsades de pointes. Key challenges for the discovery of predictive risk alleles for these SADRs are also considered.

Safety of aggressive lipid management

Data from recent clinical trials of high- versus moderate-dose statin therapy support the recommendation to achieve a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) <100 mg/dl in high-risk patients and reveal that many patients will require a high-dose statin to achieve this goal. Overall, low rates of serious musculoskeletal (<0.6%) and hepatic (<1.3%) toxicity have been observed with high-dose statin therapy. In the long-term trials, atorvastatin 80 mg had higher rates of persistent transaminase elevations but rates of myopathy and rhabdomyolysis similar to lower doses of statins. The rate of myopathy and rhabdomyolysis for simvastatin 80 mg, although still low, was about 4x higher than for atorvastatin 80 mg and lower doses of statin. A similar margin of safety would be expected in properly selected patients with characteristics similar to those who participated in the clinical trials. High-dose statin therapy or combination therapy will be required for the large majority of very high-risk patients to achieve the optional LDL goal of <70 mg/dl. While the combination of ezetimibe, bile-acid sequestering agents, niacin, and fenofibrate with moderate dose statins appears to be reasonably safe, the long-term safety of combination with high-dose statins remains to be established. In order to optimize patient outcomes, clinicians should be aware of specific patient characteristics, such as advancing age, gender, body mass index, or glomerular filtration rate, which predict muscle and hepatic statin toxicity.

Myotoxicity associated with lipid-lowering drugs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lipid-lowering drugs are associated with myotoxicity, which ranges in severity from myalgias to rhabdomyolysis resulting in renal failure and death. Although rhabdomyolysis is rare, muscle symptoms and serum creatine kinase elevations are sufficiently frequent during the course of lipid-lowering drug therapy to pose diagnostic challenges for the clinician. Progress in our understanding of this form of myotoxicity is reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Muscle pain and weakness are the cardinal symptoms and often interfere with vigorous exercise. These symptoms may occur with or without serum creatine kinase elevations. The risk of myotoxicity is increased by combination statin-fibrate therapy as well as by factors that elevate tissue levels of the lipid-lowering drug, including the dose, drug-drug interactions, and host factors. Underlying neuromuscular diseases may become clinically apparent during statin therapy and may predispose to myotoxicity. The pathophysiology of myotoxicity most probably involves metabolic effects of the statins on the isoprenoid pool and on mitochondrial function.

SUMMARY

Management of myotoxicity requires an evaluation of risk factors prior to prescribing lipid-lowering drugs, attention to muscle symptoms, and withdrawal of drug in the event of significant abnormalities.

Global risk management in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

It is well established that aggressive risk factor modification results in improved cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes. Yet, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus have a much higher baseline risk for cardiovascular events. As type 2 diabetes and hypertension commonly coexist, achieving recommended targets for diabetes, hypertension, and CVD requires aggressive management. Global risk reduction with aggressive low-density lipoprotein reduction and through the additional normalization of glucose levels and blood pressure can help to reduce absolute risk in this very high-risk population.

Safety Profile of Rosuvastatin

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Rosuvastatin is a lipid-lowering drug, the newest of a class of drugs called HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, or 'statins', launched in the UK in March 2003. Our objective was to monitor the post-marketing safety of this drug, prescribed in primary care in England, using prescription-event monitoring.

METHODS

An observational cohort study in which patients were identified from dispensed prescriptions issued by primary care physicians/general practitioners (GPs) between August and December 2003. Demographic and clinical-event data were collected from questionnaires posted to GPs at least 6 months after the date of first prescription for each patient. Stratified analysis of specific events by starting dose of rosuvastatin was conducted. Follow-up and causality assessment of medically significant events was undertaken.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 11,680 patients (median age 64 years); 50.3% were males (5880 of 11,680). The median period of treatment was 9.8 months. Of these patients, 72.7% (n = 8494) were started on rosuvastatin 10 mg/day. A total of 17.5% (n = 2047) of the patients were reported to have stopped treatment with rosuvastatin. Myalgia was the most frequent reason for stopping rosuvastatin and the most frequently reported clinical event. A 2.5-fold increase in the rate of abnormal liver-function tests (LFTs) was observed for patients started on rosuvastatin 40 mg/day compared with those started on 10 mg/day (2.71; 95% CI 1.53, 4.53). No case of rhabdomyolysis was reported in this cohort.

CONCLUSION

Rosuvastatin was considered to be a reasonably well tolerated drug. In the majority of patients, rosuvastatin was prescribed in line with recommendations. Abnormality of LFTs was found to be more frequent with the 40 mg/day dosage of rosuvastatin. Results from this study should be taken into account together with those of other clinical and pharmacoepidemiological studies of rosuvastatin.

Open-Label Extension Studies

The number of open-label extension studies being performed has increased enormously in recent years. Often it is difficult to differentiate between these extension studies and the double-blind, controlled studies that preceded them. If undertaken primarily to gather more patient-years of exposure to the new drug in order to understand and gain confidence in its safety profile, open-label extension studies can play a useful and legitimate role in drug development and therapeutics. However, this can only occur if the open-label extension study is designed, executed, analysed and reported competently. Most of the value accrued in open-label extension studies is gained from a refinement in the perception of the expected incidence of adverse effects that have most likely already been identified as part of the preclinical and clinical trial programme. We still have to rely heavily on post-marketing safety surveillance systems to alert us to type B (unpredictable) adverse reactions because open-label extension studies are unlikely to provide useful information about these types of often serious and relatively rare adverse reactions. Random allocation into test and control groups is needed to produce precise incidence data on pharmacologically expected, or type A, adverse effects. Some increased confidence about incidence rates might result from the open-label extension study; however, as these studies are essentially uncontrolled and biased, the data are not of great value. Other benefits have been proposed to be gained from open-label extension studies. These include ongoing access to an effective but otherwise unobtainable medicine by the volunteers who participated in the phase III pivotal trials. However, there are unappreciated ethical issues about the appropriateness of enrolling patients whose response to previous treatment is uncertain, largely because treatment allocation in the preceding randomised, double-blind, controlled trial has not been revealed at the time of entry into the open-label extension study. Negative aspects of open-label extension studies revolve around their use as a marketing tool, as they build a market for the drug and generate pressure for subsidised access to the drug from consumers and their physicians. Consumers, institutions where these studies are conducted and research ethics committees need to be convinced of the motives, as well as the quality, of the open-label extension study and its execution before supporting such studies. Open-label extension studies do have a legitimate but limited place in the clinical development of new medicines. The negative perceptions about these studies have arisen because of perversion of acceptable rationales for this type of study and a failure to recognise (or disclose) the limitations resulting from the inherent weaknesses in their design. Increased human exposure to a new medicine under reasonably controlled circumstances to increase confidence in the safety of the medicine is an acceptable rationale for an open-label extension study, and a useful activity to increase the knowledge of the safety profile of a new medicine. However, this goal is increasingly being achieved by means other than open-label extension studies.

Rosuvastatin 5 and 10 mg/d: a pilot study of the effects in hypercholesterolemic adults unable to tolerate other statins and reach LDL cholesterol goals with nonstatin lipid-lowering therapies

BACKGROUND

Patients with high levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) might not tolerate 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors ("statins") because of adverse effects (AEs) and might not respond well enough to nonstatin lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) to meet LDL-C goals.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the acceptability, effectiveness, and safety profile of rosuvastatin 5 and 10 mg/d in consecutively referred patients with primary high LDL-C who were unable to tolerate other statins because of myalgia and, subsequently in some cases, unable to reach LDL-C goals with nonstatin LLT.

METHODS

This prospective, open-label pilot study was conducted in consecutively referred male and female patients aged 38 to 80 years with primary high LDL-C (mean, 177 mg/dL) at The Cholesterol Center, Jewish Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio. Patients were instructed in the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) therapeutic lifestyle changes diet. Rosuvastatin 5 mg/d was administered to patients categorized by NCEP ATP III risk stratification as moderately high risk, and rosuvastatin 10 mg/d was administered to patients categorized as high or very high risk. End points included acceptability (assessed using patient-initiated discontinuation of rosuvastatin), effectiveness (absolute and percentage reductions in LDL-C and triglycerides), and safety profile (aspartate and alanine aminotransferases [AST and ALT, respectively] >3 times the laboratory upper limit of normal [xULN] or elevations in creatine kinase [CK]>10xULN).

RESULTS

A total of 61 patients were enrolled (41 women, 20 men; mean [SD] age, 60 [10] years; 5-mg/d dose, 25 patients; 10-mg/d dose, 36 patients). Myalgia, a predominant AE, had caused 50 patients to previously discontinue treatment with atorvastatin; 30, simvastatin; 19, pravastatin; 5, fluvastatin; 2, ezetimibe/simvastatin; and 1, lovastatin. Eighteen patients subsequently failed to reach LDL-C goals with nonstatin LLT(s) alone (colesevelam, 10 patients; ezetimibe, 8; niacin extended release, 2; and fenofibrate, 1). After a median treatment duration of 16 weeks, rosuvastatin 5 mg/d+diet was associated with a mean (SD) decrease from baseline in LDL-C of 75 (34) mg/dL (mean [SD] %Delta, -42% [18%]) (P<0.001 vs baseline). After a median treatment duration of 44 weeks, rosuvastatin 10 mg/d+diet was associated with a mean (SD) decrease from baseline in LDL-C of 79 (49) mg/dL (mean [SD] %Delta, -42% [24%]) (P<0.001 vs baseline). Of the 61 patients, 1 receiving the 10-mg/d dose discontinued rosuvastatin treatment because of unilateral muscular pain after 4 weeks; no AST or ALT levels were >3xULN, and no CK levels were >10xULN.

CONCLUSION

In these 61 hypercholesterolemic patients unable to tolerate other statins and, subsequently in some cases, unable to meet LDL-C goals while receiving nonstatin LIT monotherapy, these preliminary observations suggest that rosuvastatin at doses of 5 and 10 mg/d+diet was well tolerated, effective, and had a good safety profile.

Expanding options with a wider range of rosuvastatin doses

BACKGROUND

The dose range for rosuvastatin in Europe has recently been expanded to 5 to 40 mg and is now in line with the dose range currently available in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this article was to review the efficacy and safety data available for the rosuvastatin 5-mg dose and discuss these data in the context of the full 5- to 40-mg dose range.

METHODS

Articles referring to clinical efficacy or safety data for the 5-mg dose of rosuvastatin were identified and reviewed after a search of the MEDLINE database (2000-August 2006; English language only) using the search term rosuvastatin. Proceedings from major cardiology congresses (2000-2006) were also searched for additional information.

RESULTS

Rosuvastatin 5 mg is significantly (P < 0.001) more effective at reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and total cholesterol (42% and 30%) levels compared with atorvastatin 10 mg (36% and 27%), simvastatin 20 mg (36% and 25%), and pravastatin 20 mg (27% and 19%). Rosuvastatin 5 mg allows significantly more patients to reach their LDL-C goals as recommended by the 2003 European guidelines and the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) (49%-52% and 67%-71%) than atorvastatin 10 mg (36%, P < 0.001; 53%, P < 0.01), simvastatin 20 mg (37%, P < 0.001; 64%, P < 0.05), and pravastatin 20 mg (12%, P < 0.001; 49%, P < 0.001). Rosuvastatin is well tolerated across the 5- to 40-mg dose range, with a type and incidence of adverse events similar to the other commonly available, but less effective, statins. The introduction of a 5-mg dose offers greater flexibility to prescribing physicians in that it provides an additional dosing option for those patients who are at a lower cardiovascular risk or who have an increased potential for developing myopathy with statin therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Rosuvastatin 5 mg is well tolerated and has beneficial effects across the atherogenic lipid profile by reducing LDL-C and total cholesterol, raising high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and helping a greater proportion of patients reach their LDL-C goals.

How safe is aggressive statin therapy?

The most recent guidelines of the National Cholesterol Education Program recommend more aggressive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals: <100 mg/dL for patients at moderate or high risk of cardiovascular disease, and <70 mg/dL for patients at very high risk. These lower goals are more likely to be achieved using the more powerful statins--atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin. Although statins are widely used, extensively studied, and known to have an excellent safety profile, the perception of many health care providers and patients is that safety concerns about the more efficacious statins, especially at high doses, limit their use. However, clinical data consistently support the view that adverse events are uncommon even when intensive therapy is used to reach aggressive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals. Overall, the more potent statins have similar safety profiles. The benefits of aggressive statin treatment in reducing the risk of cardiovascular events appear to far outweigh any potential risks of adverse events.

Are lower levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol beneficial? A review of recent data

In the 1960s, epidemiologic studies established a link between elevated serum cholesterol and increased risk of cardiovascular events. Extensive clinical trial data subsequently highlighted 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (ie, statins) as the most effective pharmacotherapy for lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and showed that statin-mediated LDL cholesterol reductions were associated with significant improvements in cardiovascular outcomes. Such findings are reflected in current cardiovascular disease management guidelines, which focus on LDL cholesterol as the primary therapeutic target. These guidelines recommend target LDL cholesterol levels. However, a number of clinical trials have failed to identify an LDL cholesterol threshold level below which no further cardiovascular risk reduction occurs. Such findings suggest that optimal risk reduction may require greater reductions in LDL cholesterol than are currently being achieved. This review examines recent data highlighting the benefits of more pronounced LDL cholesterol reductions and considers how this could be achieved in clinical practice when many patients are not even reaching current targets.

The safety of aggressive statin therapy: how much can low-density lipoprotein cholesterol be lowered?

Recent clinical trials have consistently demonstrated that reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol to very low levels will substantially reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The lipid-lowering agents of choice are the statins, which are generally considered safe and effective. Of the various agents available, atorvastatin and rosuvastatin are the most powerful, followed by simvastatin. Serious adverse effects with statin therapy are uncommon and primarily involve effects on the liver and skeletal muscle. The risk increases with the statin dose and coadministration with other drugs metabolized by the same metabolic pathway, such as the cytochrome P-450 system. For patients who do not achieve adequate reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels with statin therapy of moderate potency, the clinician can up-titrate the dose of the initial statin, institute combination therapy and carefully monitor for adverse effects, or switch to a lower dose of a more potent statin. The strategy chosen depends on the degree of lipid lowering required and on safety, cost, and compliance issues. This article reviews evidence concerning the benefits of reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels below currently established targets and addresses the question of whether Intensive statin therapy is likely to Increase the risk of adverse events or concomitant comorbidity.

Short-Term Memory Loss Associated with Rosuvastatin

Memory loss and cognitive impairment have been reported in the literature in association with several 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins), but we found no published case reports associated with rosuvastatin. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of rosuvastatin-related short-term memory loss. A 53-year-old Caucasian man with hypercholesterolemia experienced memory loss after being treated with rosuvastatin 10 mg/day. He had no other concomitant conditions or drug therapies. After discontinuation of rosuvastatin, the neuropsychiatric adverse reaction resolved gradually, suggesting a probable drug association. During the following year, the patient remained free from neuropsychiatric disturbances. Clinicians should be aware of possible adverse cognitive reactions during statin therapy, including rosuvastatin.

Treating dyslipidaemia in the setting of diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease: a less commonly perceived therapeutic perspective in clinical practice

Diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease are being managed more belligerently in recent times, with multifactorial cardiovascular risk reduction being the focus of therapeutic interventions. We review some of the caveats to be exercised in the treatment of these patients that are pertinent to clinicians in daily clinical practice.

Drug Insight: immunomodulatory effects of statins—potential benefits for renal patients?

Statins inhibit 3-hydroxyl-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase, an enzyme crucial to cholesterol synthesis. Drugs of this class reduce the risk of coronary heart disease and stroke, in large part through lipid modulation. Emerging evidence indicates that statins have additional modes of action. These actions, which encompass modification of endothelial function, plaque stability, thrombus formation and inflammatory pathways, are widely referred to as 'pleiotropic effects'. These pleiotropic effects indicate that the therapeutic potential of statins might extend beyond cholesterol lowering and cardiovascular disease to other inflammatory disorders or conditions such as transplantation, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and chronic kidney disease. Experimental and clinical data provide evidence to support these broader applications of statins; however, more large-scale trials are needed to clarify the therapeutic benefit.

Safety Issues with Statin Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To describe the most important potential adverse effects related to statin therapy, discuss mechanisms of toxicity and drug interactions, and suggest approaches for enhancing safety with statin therapy.

DATA SOURCES

Large-scale clinical trials, government databases and papers, and recent studies of statin safety.

STUDY SELECTION

By the author.

DATA EXTRACTION

By the author.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The number of patients requiring intensive therapy with statins to achieve lipid goals is climbing, and as the number grows, so does the potential for adverse effects with these agents. The most detrimental adverse effects of statins are hepatotoxicity and myopathy. Liver dysfunction induced by statins is rare and usually mild, with asymptomatic transaminase elevation or acute cholecystitis. Progression to liver failure is exceedingly rare, and transaminase elevations is usually reversible with dose reduction. Statin-associated myopathy is generally a concern when patients have more than one risk factor for muscle syndromes, such as an elderly patient with poor renal function. Drug interactions represent an additional concern, especially for atorvastatin, lovastatin, and simvastatin, all of which are metabolized by the important 3A4 isoenzyme of the cytochrome P450 system of the liver.

CONCLUSION

The benefits of all available statins for the treatment or prevention of cardiovascular disease outweigh any potential risks of therapy. For patient groups most susceptible to adverse effects, such as the elderly and those on multiple medications, clinicians should consider the use of statins that are least likely to interact with other medications.

Rationale for intensive statin treatment in high-risk patients

Intensive lipid-lowering therapy with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) is now an established regimen for patients at high risk for cardiovascular events, regardless of baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Treatment with statins to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels significantly below 100 mg/dL has been shown to further reduce the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients and has provided the necessary data for an update to the National Cholesterol Education Program's Third Adult Treatment Panel (ATP III) guidelines. Intensive statin therapy is also well tolerated, with no increased risk of noncardiovascular adverse events and a low incidence of clinically significant liver or muscle enzyme abnormalities. Results of recent clinical and surrogate end point trials confirm that intensive lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol is beneficial and safe in a majority of high-risk patients.