Current and future treatments of HIV-associated dyslipidemia

A Prospective, Multicentre, Open-Label Single-Arm Exploratory Study to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Saroglitazar on Hypertriglyceridemia in HIV Associated Lipodystrophy

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to explore the efficacy and safety of saroglitazar 4 mg on hypertriglyceridemia in patients with HIV associated lipodystrophy.

METHODS

During this 12-week prospective, multi-centric, open-label, single arm exploratory study, 50 patients were enrolled to receive saroglitazar 4 mg orally once daily in the morning before breakfast. The primary efficacy endpoint was the percent change in triglyceride (TG) levels from baseline to Week 6 and Week 12. The secondary efficacy endpoints were assessment of low-density-lipoprotein (LDL), very-low-density-lipoprotein (VLDL), high-density-lipoprotein (HDL), non-HDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, apo-lipoprotein (Apo) A1, Apo B, and C-peptide and fasting insulin for HOMA beta and HOMA IR. Safety assessment was performed during the study.

RESULTS

Saroglitazar 4 mg significantly decreased the serum TG levels from baseline at Week 6 (percent change: -40.98; 95% CI: -50.82, -31.15) and Week 12 (percent change -45.11; 95% CI: -52.37, -37.86). Reduction in VLDL cholesterol (percent change: -46.33; 95% CI: -52.89, -39.76) and total cholesterol (percent change: 7.37; 95% CI: 1.96, 12.78) was observed at week 12 from baseline. Saroglitazar increased HDL cholesterol (percent change: 34.56, 95% CI: 22.22, 46.90), Apo A1 (percent change: 33.16; 95% CI: 18.69, 47.63) and Apo B (percent change: 10.55, 95% CI: 2.86, 18.25) levels at week 12 from baseline. Saroglitazar treatment led to increase in the C-peptide (percent change: 59.42, 95% CI: 48.78, 70.06), fasting insulin levels (percent change: 47.10; 95% CI: 38.63, 55.57), HOMA of beta cell function for C-peptide (percent change: 71.67; 95% CI: 39.09, 104.26) and HOMA of insulin resistance for C-peptide (percent change: 58.29, 95% CI: 46.74, 69.83) at week 12 from baseline. Saroglitazar treatment was safe and well tolerated in this study.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the observed changes in lipid profile after 12 weeks of saroglitazar treatment were in the direction of improvement in patients with HIV associated lipodystrophy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial Registry of India Phase II/CTRI/2010/091/000107.

Comparative Effectiveness and Toxicity of Statins Among HIV-Infected Patients

BACKGROUND

dyslipidemia is common and is often treated with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins). Little is known about the comparative effectiveness of statins among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. This study compared the effectiveness and toxicity of statins among HIV-infected patients in clinical care.

METHODS

we conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients starting their initial statin medications at 2 large HIV clinics (N = 700). The primary observation was change in lipid levels during statin therapy. Secondary observations included whether individualized National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goals for low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels were reached, and toxicity rates. We used linear regression to examine change in lipid levels, controlling for baseline lipid values and demographic and clinical characteristics. We conducted secondary analyses using propensity scores to address confounding by indication.

RESULTS

the most commonly prescribed statins were atorvastatin (N = 303), pravastatin (N = 280), and rosuvastatin (N = 95). One year after starting a statin therapy, patients who received atorvastatin or rosuvastatin had significantly greater decreases in total cholesterol, LDL-C, and non-HDL-C than patients on pravastatin. The likelihood of reaching NCEP goals for LDL-C levels was higher with the use of rosuvastatin (OR 2.1; P = .03) and atorvastatin (odds ratio [OR], 2.1; P = .001) compared with that of pravastatin. The likelihood of reaching NCEP goals for non-HDL-C levels was higher for rosuvastatin (OR 2.3; P = .045) but not atorvastatin (OR, 1.5; P = .1) compared with pravastatin. Toxicity rates were similar for all 3 statins: 7.3% for atorvastatin, 6.1% for pravastatin, and 5.3% for rosuvastatin.

CONCLUSIONS

our findings suggest that atorvastatin and rosuvastatin are preferable to pravastatin for treatment of HIV-infected patients with dyslipidemia, due to greater declines in total cholesterol, LDL-C, and non-HDL-C, with similar lower toxicity rates.