Effectiveness and safety of laropiprant on niacin-induced flushing.

Extended-release niacin (ERN) improves multiple lipid parameters but is underused owing to niacin-induced flushing (NIF). Laropiprant (LRPT) reduces NIF; however, its effects on chronic flushing (>6 months) have not been studied. We examined whether after 20 weeks of treatment with ERN/LRPT, patients who continued ERN/LRPT would experience less NIF than patients who stopped LRPT and continued ERN alone. A total of 1,152 dyslipidemic patients were randomized 2:2:1 to group 1, ERN/LRPT 1 g/20 mg/day from 0 to 4 weeks and then ERN/LRPT 2 g/40 mg/day from 5 to 32 weeks; group 2, ERN/LRPT 1 g/20 mg/day from 0 to 4 weeks, ERN/LRPT 2 g/40 mg/day from 5 to 20 weeks, and then ERN 2 g/day without LRPT from 21 to 32 weeks; or group 3, placebo for the entire study. The end points included the number of days each week with a moderate or greater Global Flushing Severity Score (GFSS) ≥4 (primary end point) and the percentage of patients with a maximum GFSS of ≥4 (secondary end point) during the postwithdrawal period (weeks 21 to 32). ERN/LRPT produced significantly less NIF than ERN alone during the postwithdrawal period, as measured by the number of days each week with a GFSS of ≥4 (p <0.001) and the percentage of patients with a maximum GFSS of ≥4 (p <0.001; ERN/LRPT 19.6%; ERN 48.9%; placebo 9.2%). Compared with ERN alone, ERN/LRPT produced fewer drug-related adverse experiences during the postwithdrawal period. After 20 weeks of stable maintenance therapy, dyslipidemic patients treated continuously with ERN/LRPT experienced less NIF than did patients who had had LRPT withdrawn and had continued with ERN alone. In conclusion, the results of our study support the long-term efficacy of ERN/LRPT in reducing NIF symptoms.

Effects of simvastatin on the lipid profile and attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals when added to thiazolidinedione therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease is the major cause of mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM). Given the increasingly aggressive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals for patients with DM set by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III and the American Diabetes Association, many patients remain above target. Treatment with thiazolidinediones (TZDs) improves glycemic control but does not lower (and may raise) LDL-C concentrations. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the lipid-modifying efficacy and tolerability of adding the hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A-reductase inhibitor simvastatin to existing TZD therapy in patients with type 2 DM. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Patients with type 2 DM who were taking a stable dose of pioglitazone or rosiglitazone and had a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) value < or =9.0% and an LDL-C concentration > 100 mg/dL were randomized to receive simvastatin 40 mg (the recommended initial dose for patients with DM) or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary end point was the effect of treatment on LDL-C concentrations. Other lipid, lipoprotein, and safety measures were also assessed. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-three patients (127 [50.2%] men, 126 [49.8%] women; mean age, 56 years) were randomized to treatment (123 simvastatin, 130 placebo). At the end of the study, mean LDL-C concentrations were reduced 34.)% from baseline (from 134.3 to 89.5 mg/dL) in the simvastatin group and were unchanged in the placebo group (P<0.001). Simvastatin produced significant reductions in concentrations of total cholesterol, triglycerides (TG), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein (apo) B compared with placebo (all, P<0.001 ) and significant increases in concentrations of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) ( P=0.002 ) and apo A-I ( P=0.006 ). In patients who had not attained target concentrations of LDL-C (<100 mg/dL), TG (<150 mg/dL), or HDL-C (>45 mg/dL) at baseline, significantly more simvastatin recipients had achieved these goals at the end of the study compared with placebo recipients (LDL-C: 67.3% vs 5.2%, respectively, P<0.001; HDL-C: 95.3% vs 83.6%, P<0.05; TG: 40.8% vs 11.0%, P<0.001 ). Simvastatin was well tolerated, and no clinically meaningful differences in the incidence of serious adverse events, treatment-related adverse events, or discontinuations due to adverse events were observed between groups. There were no significant between-group differences in glycemic control (HbA1c) or concentrations of fasting insulin, creatine phosphokinase, or hepatic transaminases. CONCLUSION: Simvastatin was an effective and generally well tolerated treatment for hyperlipidemia when used in combination with TZD therapy in this population of patients with type 2 DM.

Differential effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein A-I are consistent across hypercholesterolemic patient subgroups.

BACKGROUND: In addition to lowering plasma levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), statins also raise high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). HYPOTHESIS: Recent studies have shown that treatment with simvastatin results in larger increases in HDL-C than those seen with atorvastatin. The results of three clinical studies are analyzed, comparing the effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on HDL-C and apolipoprotein A-I (apo A-I) in the total cohort and in several subgroups of hypercholesterolemic patients. The three studies were all multicenter, randomized clinical trials that included simvastatin (20-80 mg) and atorvastatin (10-80 mg) treatment arms. The subgroup analyses performed were gender; age (< 65 and > or = 65 years); baseline HDL-C (male: < 40 or > or = 40 mg/dl; female: < 45 or > or = 45 mg/dl), baseline LDL-C (< 160 or > or = 160 mg/dl), and baseline triglycerides (< 200 or > or = 200 mg/dl). RESULTS: Both drugs produced similar increases in HDL-C levels at low doses; however, at higher drug doses (40 and 80 mg), HDL-C showed a significantly greater increase with simvastatin than with atorvastatin (p < 0.05 to < 0.001). Therefore, while HDL-C remained consistently elevated across all doses of simvastatin, there appeared to be a pattern of decreasing HDL-C with an increasing dose of atorvastatin. A similar negative dose response pattern was also observed with apo A-I in atorvastatin-treated patients, suggesting a reduction in the number of circulating HDL particles at higher doses. Both drugs reduced LDL-C and triglycerides in a dose-dependent fashion, with atorvastatin showing slightly greater effects. The differential effects of atorvastatin and simvastatin on HDL-C and apo A-I were observed for both the whole study cohorts and all subgroups examined; thus, no consistent treatment-by-subgroup interactions were observed. CONCLUSION: The data presented show that, across different hypercholesterolemic patient subgroups, simvastatin increases HDL-C and apo A-I more than atorvastatin at higher doses, with evidence of a negative dose response effect on HDL-C and apo A-I with atorvastatin, but not simvastatin.

Comparative effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients with characteristics of metabolic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Hypercholesterolemic patients with metabolic syndrome (MS) are at high risk for coronary heart disease. The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines provide the option of aggressively lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in hypercholesterolemic patients with MS. OBJECTIVE: The lipid-modifying efficacy of simvastatin and atorvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients with MS as defined by NCEP ATP III was assessed. METHODS: A post hoc subgroup analysis was performed on data from a 36-week, multicenter (54 sites worldwide), randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-escalation (forced-titration) study designed to assess the effects of simvastatin (40-80 mg) and atorvastatin (20-80 mg) on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein (apo) A-I levels in patients with LDL-C > or = 160 mg/dL. Patients were classified as having MS if they met >/=3 of the following criteria: (1) triglyceride (TG) level > or =150 mg/dL; (2) HDL-C <40 mg/dL (men) or <50 mg/dL (women); (3) secondary diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus and/or taking antidiabetic medication and/or fasting serum glucose (FSG) level > or =110 mg/dL; (4) secondary diagnosis of hypertension and/or taking antihypertensive medication and/or systolic blood pressure (SBP)/diastolic blood pressure (DBP) > or =130/ > or =85 mm Hg; and (5) body mass index (BMI) > or =30 kg/m(2) (surrogate for waist circumference). RESULTS: Of 808 evaluable patients, 212 (26.2%) were classified as having MS at baseline. Compared with the non-MS subgroup, MS patients were slightly older and more likely to be female. They also had higher BMI, SBP/DBP, FSG, and TG levels, and lower HDL-C and apo A-I levels than non-MS patients. The simvastatin group contained 99 patients; the atorvastatin group, 113 patients. Both drugs produced large reductions in total cholesterol, LDL-C, non-HDL-C, TG, and apo B, with atorvastatin producing slightly greater reductions in TG. However, simvastatin consistently produced larger increases in HDL-C and apo A-I than atorvastatin, especially at higher doses. After 36 weeks of treatment, 47.7% and 48.5% in the simvastatin and atorvastatin groups, respectively, no longer met > or =3 of the MS criteria. CONCLUSIONS: In hypercholesterolemic patients with characteristics of MS, simvastatin and atorvastatin had comparable beneficial effects on apo B-containing atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins, and MS status was effectively modified by both drugs. However, although atorvastatin produced slightly larger decreases in TG, simvastatin produced larger increases in HDL-C.

Effects of simvastatin on C-reactive protein in mixed hyperlipidemic and hypertriglyceridemic patients.

This study examined the effects of simvastatin on C-reactive protein (CRP) and other inflammatory markers in study subjects with significant elevations in triglyceride (TG) blood levels. CRP, vascular cellular adhesion molecule (VCAM), serum amyloid A (SAA), and interleukin 6 (IL-6) were measured in archived plasma samples from 2 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies designed to examine the lipid-altering efficacy of simvastatin in study subjects with elevated TGs. In the first study, 130 study subjects with mixed hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol > or =130 mg/dl; TGs 300 to 700 mg/dl) received placebo or simvastatin 40 or 80 mg once daily for three 6-week periods in a complete-block crossover design. In the second study, 195 study subjects with hypertriglyceridemia (TGs 300 to 900 mg/dl) received daily doses of placebo or simvastatin 20, 40, or 80 mg for 6 weeks. Significant but weak correlations were observed between baseline CRP values and baseline levels of LDL cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, but not with TGs. CRP was also correlated with body mass index and fasting levels of glucose and insulin. Treatment with simvastatin 20, 40, and 80 mg led to significant reductions in CRP plasma levels versus placebo (p <0.05). Although CRP change was weakly correlated with changes in LDL cholesterol, TGs, and HDL cholesterol, results of regression analyses showed that only baseline CRP and treatment allocation were significant predictors of CRP response after 6 weeks of study drug administration. Simvastatin had no effect on VCAM, SAA, or IL-6. In summary, simvastatin significantly reduced CRP in patients with mixed hyperlipidemia and hypertriglyceridemia.