ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Concerns about the effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors ('statins') on health-related quality of life may contribute to their underuse in older adults with and at risk for cardiovascular disease. These concerns also may prevent clinicians from enrolling older patients in clinical trials assessing the efficacy of statins as a preventive therapy for Alzheimer's disease. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of pravastatin and tocopherol (vitamin E), alone and in combination, on health-related quality of life in older adults. STUDY DESIGN: Double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover study. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-one community-dwelling men and women aged > or = 70 years with low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) > or = 3.62 mmol/L (140 mg/dl) participated. METHODS: Subjects received pravastatin for 6 months then pravastatin plus tocopherol for an additional 6 months (group 1), or tocopherol for 6 months then pravastatin plus tocopherol for an additional 6 months (group 2). Dosages were pravastatin 20 mg daily and tocopherol 400 IU daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The following health-related quality-of-life measures were assessed at baseline, after 6 months and after 1 year: health perception, depression, physical function, cognitive function and sleep behaviour. In addition, data on adverse effects and laboratory abnormalities were obtained. RESULTS: Pravastatin reduced levels of total cholesterol (-21%, p < 0.001) and LDL-C (-29%, p < 0.001). Health-related quality-of-life scores, physical adverse effects, muscle enzyme levels and liver function tests did not change after 12 months of therapy with pravastatin, tocopherol or their combination. CONCLUSION: Both pravastatin and tocopherol have a good safety profile, are well tolerated and do not adversely affect health-related quality of life in older patients with hypercholesterolaemia. Given the significant beneficial cardiovascular effects of statin therapy in older adults and the potential role of statins in prevention of Alzheimer's disease, concerns about adverse effects on quality of life should not deter use of these medications in this population.
Subject(s)
Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Hypercholesterolemia/drug therapy , Hypercholesterolemia/psychology , Hypolipidemic Agents/therapeutic use , Pravastatin/therapeutic use , Tocopherols/therapeutic use , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Cholesterol, HDL/blood , Cholesterol, LDL/blood , Cross-Over Studies , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Heart Rate/drug effects , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Hypercholesterolemia/blood , Hypolipidemic Agents/administration & dosage , Hypolipidemic Agents/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Pravastatin/administration & dosage , Pravastatin/adverse effects , Quality of Life , Tocopherols/administration & dosage , Tocopherols/adverse effects , Triglycerides/bloodABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although total cholesterol concentrations measured by portable lipid analyzers have acceptable bias and precision in young and middle-aged adults, clinically relevant differences in HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglyceride values have been described. Furthermore, the accuracy of portable lipid analyzers in older hyperlipidemic individuals, who have a high incidence of coronary heart disease, has not been validated. This study determined the biases and variability in portable lipid measurements in older patients with hypercholesterolemia and related them to National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. METHODS: Participants were > or =70 years of age with fasting serum LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations > 1.40 g/L. Fasting fingerstick samples were analyzed on a Cholestech L.D.X desktop analyzer. Antecubital venous samples were analyzed in a proficiency-certified clinical laboratory. RESULTS: Portable measurements systematically overestimated triglycerides (0.296 g/L; P <0.001) and HDL-C (0.015 g/L; P = 0.026). LDL-C concentrations were underestimated (0.043 g/L; P = 0.046). Total and non-HDL cholesterol calculations based on the portable lipid device provided unbiased estimates, but wide variability was present. Significant variability in lipid determinations limited their clinical usefulness in individual patients, especially because 2 SD of the mean bias between the laboratory and the portable determinations of LDL-C and non-HDL cholesterol exceeded the 0.30 g/L cutoff that defines treatment targets in the current lipid guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Lipid values obtained from portable lipid analyzers may be useful for screening, but they should not be used to make clinical decisions regarding the diagnosis and management of dyslipidemia in individual patients.
