Lipid-altering efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day: long-term experience in a large group of patients with hypercholesterolemia. World Wide Expanded Dose Simvastatin Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol promote the development of atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease. HYPOTHESIS: Simvastatin 80 mg/day will be more effective than simvastatin 40 mg/day at reducing LDL cholesterol and will be well tolerated. METHODS: Two similar, randomized, multicenter, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, 48-week studies were performed to evaluate the long-term lipid-altering efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day in patients with hypercholesterolemia. One study conducted in the US enrolled patients meeting the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) LDL cholesterol criteria for pharmacologic treatment. In the other multinational study, patients with LDL cholesterol levels > or = 4.2 mmol/l were enrolled. At 20 centers in the US and 19 countries world-wide, 1,105 hypercholesterolemic patients, while on a lipid-lowering diet, were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:3 to receive simvastatin 40 mg (n = 436) or 80 mg (n = 669) once daily for 24 weeks. Those patients completing an initial 24-week base study were enrolled in a 24-week blinded extension. Patients who had started on the 80 mg dose in the base study continued on the same dose in the extension, while those who had started on the 40 mg dose were rerandomized at a 1:1 ratio to simvastatin 40 or 80 mg in the extension. RESULTS: There was a significant advantage in the LDL cholesterol-lowering effect of the 80 mg dose compared with that of the 40 mg dose, which was maintained over the 48 weeks of treatment. The mean percentage reductions (95% confidence intervals) from baseline in LDL cholesterol for the 40 and 80 mg groups were 41% (42, 39) and 47% (48, 46), respectively, for the 24-week base study, and 41% (43, 39) and 46% (47, 45), respectively, after 48 weeks of treatment (p < 0.001 between groups). Larger reductions in total cholesterol and triglycerides were also observed with the 80 mg dose compared with the 40 mg dose at Weeks 24 and 48. Both doses were well tolerated, with close to 95% of patients enrolled completing the entire 48 weeks of treatment. Myopathy (muscle symptoms plus creatine kinase increase > 10 fold upper limit of normal) and clinically significant hepatic transaminase increases (> 3 times the upper limit of normal) occurred infrequently with both doses. There was no significant difference between the groups in the number of patients with such increases, although there were more cases for both with the 80 mg dose. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the 40 mg dose, simvastatin 80 mg produced greater reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, and triglycerides. Both doses were well tolerated.

Lipid-altering efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day: worldwide long-term experience in patients with hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Clinical data suggesting that larger decreases in low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) result in greater reductions in coronary heart disease events have led to the establishment of aggressive LDL-C targets for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. In view of this, the efficacy and safety of a new maximum dose of simvastatin, 80 mg, were evaluated in 9 studies involving 2819 hypercholesterolemic patients. This report focuses on the combined results from the 4 main or Pivotal studies in which a total of 1936 patients received simvastatin 40 or 80 mg for 36 to 48 weeks. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Pivotal studies had similar randomized, multicenter, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group designs. Their combined results demonstrated a significant advantage in the LDL-C-lowering effect for the 80 mg dose. At week 24, the mean percentage reductions (95% confidence intervals) from baseline in LDL-C for the 40 and 80 mg groups were -39.8% (-40.9, -38.7) and -45.7% (-46.5, -45.0) respectively (p < 0.001, between groups), and larger reductions in total cholesterol and triglycerides were also observed in the 80 mg group. Both doses were well tolerated. No new or unexpected adverse events were observed and the overall clinical event profiles were similar in the two groups. Clinically significant hepatic transaminase increases (> 3 times the upper limit of normal/ULN) and myopathy (muscle symptoms plus creatine kinase increase > 10 times ULN) occurred infrequently with both doses. Simvastatin 80 mg had a comparable efficacy and safety profile in women and men as well as in non-elderly and elderly patients. CONCLUSIONS: Simvastatin 80 mg provides additional LDL-C and triglyceride reductions compared to the 40 mg dose and has an excellent safety and tolerability profile.

Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of oral rizatriptan in healthy male and female volunteers.

AIMS: The pharmacokinetics and dose proportionality of rizatriptan single oral doses from 2.5 to 15 mg administered as solutions to healthy volunteers were studied. METHODS: In a randomized, crossover study with four periods, twenty-four healthy volunteers (12 males and 12 females) took single oral doses of 2.5, 5, 10, and 15 mg rizatriptan in Periods 1-4. In a fifth period, subjects received 4 mg intravenous (i.v.) rizatriptan as a reference. Plasma and urine rizatriptan concentrations were determined at several timepoints/intervals for 12 and 24 h, respectively. RESULTS: The arithmetic mean AUC values following single oral doses of 2.5, 5, 10, and 15-mg rizatriptan were 16, 33, 72, and 127 ng ml-1 h, respectively, in males; and 19, 42, 97, and 161 ng ml-1 h, respectively, in females. The overall bioavailability (F ) of rizatriptan was approximately 40% in males. Following the 4 mg reference i.v. dose, the apparent plasma clearance (CL) and renal clearance (CLr ) were 1042 and 225 ml min-1, respectively, in males; and 821 and 174 ml min-1, respectively, in females. CONCLUSIONS: The disposition kinetics of oral rizatriptan were linear for doses of 2. 5-10 mg in males, and for doses of 2.5-5 mg in females. However, the degree of nonlinearity for higher doses was minor for both genders. The plasma concentrations of rizatriptan were slightly greater in women compared to men but the difference was not considered to be clinically meaningful. Also, the clearance of rizatriptan appeared to be mainly nonrenal.

Efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day in hypercholesterolemic patients. The Expanded Dose Simvastatin U.S. Study Group.

This randomized, multicenter, double-blind parallel-group study was performed to evaluate the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day, a dose twice the current maximum recommended dose. At 20 centers in the United States, 521 male and female hypercholesterolemic patients were randomly assigned in a ratio of 2:3 to receive simvastatin 40 or 80 mg once daily, respectively, for 24 weeks in conjunction with a lipid-lowering diet. Patients met National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol criteria for pharmacologic treatment. The mean percentage reductions (95% confidence intervals) from baseline in LDL cholesterol averaged at weeks 18 and 24 were 38% (-40 to -36) and 46% (-47 to -45) for the 40- and 80-mg groups, respectively (p <0.001 between groups). One third of patients on the 40- and 80-mg doses achieved an LDL cholesterol reduction of 46% and > or = 53%, respectively. Decreases in apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, and triglycerides were also significantly greater among patients receiving 80 mg/day. Simvastatin was well tolerated in both groups. Two patients (0.6%) in the 80-mg group developed myopathy. Consecutive, clinically significant hepatic transaminase elevations occurred in 3 (1.0%) and 6 (1.9%) patients in the 40- and 80-mg groups, respectively (p= 0.486). In conclusion, simvastatin 80 mg/day provided substantial reductions in LDL cholesterol, allowing most patients to reach their NCEP target levels; it also had an excellent safety and tolerability profile.

Some statistical methods for multiple endpoints in clinical trials.

This paper summarizes, defines, and discusses multiple endpoints comparison procedures, concepts, and methodologies for applications to clinical trials. We address the more widely used methods of alpha-level, p-value, and critical value adjustments. We examine global assessment measures such as O'Brien's test and Simes' procedure and contrast them with the alpha-adjustment procedures of Bonferroni and Holm. We propose a global assessment procedure based on categorization of the individual endpoints to form an overall composite endpoint. Additionally, we discuss a new weighting scheme for Holm's sequentially rejective alpha-adjustment procedure. Investigation of the correlation between endpoints is examined in relation to adjustment of the alpha-level. In the context of a clinical trial, the above multiplicity procedures are applied and compared. Finally, some comments concerning ease of use and relevance are summarized for the above methods.