Effectiveness of colesevelam hydrochloride in decreasing LDL cholesterol in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: a 24-week randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of colesevelam hydrochloride, a new nonsystemic lipid-lowering agent. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial performed in 1998, 494 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol level > or = 130 mg/dL and < or = 220 mg/dL) were randomized to receive placebo or colesevelam (2.3 g/d, 3.0 g/d, 3.8 g/d, or 4.5 g/d) for 24 weeks. Fasting serum lipid profiles were measured to assess efficacy. Adverse events were monitored, and discontinuation rates and compliance rates were analyzed. The primary outcome measure was the mean absolute change of LDL cholesterol from baseline to the end of the 24-week treatment period. RESULTS: Colesevelam lowered mean LDL cholesterol levels 9% to 18% in a dose-dependent manner (P<.001), with a median LDL cholesterol reduction of 20% at 4.5 g/d. The reduction in LDL cholesterol levels was maximal after 2 weeks and sustained throughout the study. Mean total cholesterol levels decreased 4% to 10% (P<.001), while median high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased 3% to 4% (P<.001). Median triglyceride levels increased by 5% to 10% in placebo and colesevelam treatment groups relative to baseline (P<.05), but none of these differences were significantly different from placebo. Mean apolipoprotein B levels decreased 6% to 12% in an apparent dose-dependent manner (P<.001). No significant differences occurred in adverse events or discontinuation rates between groups, and compliance rates were between 88% and 92% for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Colesevelam was efficacious, decreasing mean LDL cholesterol levels by up to 18%, and well tolerated without serious adverse events.

Long-term efficacy and safety of cerivastatin 0.8 mg in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND: Statins are the agents of choice in reducing elevated plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). HYPOTHESIS: Cerivastatin 0.8 mg has greater long-term efficacy in reducing LDL-C than pravastatin 40 mg in primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS: In this double-blind, parallel-group, 52-week study, patients (n = 1,170) were randomized (4:1:1) to cerivastatin 0.8 mg, cerivastatin 0.4 mg, or placebo daily. After 8 weeks, placebo was switched to pravastatin 40 mg. Patients with insufficient LDL-C lowering after 24 weeks were allowed open-labeled resin therapy. RESULTS: Cerivastatin 0.8 mg reduced LDL-C versus cerivastatin 0.4 mg (40.8 vs. 33.6%, p <0.0001) or pravastatin 40 mg (31.5%, p<0.0001), and brought 81.8% of all patients, and 54.1% of patients with atherosclerotic disease, to National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goals. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg improved mean total C (-29.0%), triglycerides (-18.3%), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) (+9.7%) (all p < or = 0.013 vs. pravastatin 40 mg). Higher baseline triglycerides were associated with greater reductions in triglycerides and elevations in HDL-C with cerivastatin. Cerivastatin was well tolerated; the most commonly reported adverse events were arthralgia, headache, pharyngitis, and rhinitis. Symptomatic creatine kinase > 10x the upper limit of normal (ULN) occurred in 1, 1.5, and 0% of patients receiving cerivastatin 0.8 mg, cerivastatin 0.4 mg, and pravastatin 40 mg, respectively. Repeat hepatic transaminases >3 x ULN occurred in 0.3-0.5, 0.5, and 0% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: In long-term use, cerivastatin 0.8 mg effectively and safely brings the majority of patients to NCEP goal.

Coadministration of colesevelam hydrochloride with atorvastatin lowers LDL cholesterol additively.

Colesevelam hydrochloride is a novel, potent, non-absorbed lipid-lowering agent previously shown to reduce low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. To examine the efficacy and safety of coadministration of colesevelam and atorvastatin, administration of these agents alone or in combination was examined in a double-blind study of 94 hypercholesterolemic men and women (baseline LDL cholesterol > or =160 mg/dl). After 4 weeks on the American Heart Association Step I diet, patients were randomized among five groups: placebo; colesevelam 3.8 g/day; atorvastatin 10 mg/day; coadminstered colesevelam 3.8 g/day plus atorvastatin 10 mg/day; or atorvastatin 80 mg/day. Fasting lipids were measured at screening, baseline and 2 and 4 weeks of treatment. LDL cholesterol decreased by 12-53% in all active treatment groups (P<0.01). LDL cholesterol reductions with combination therapy (48%) were statistically superior to colesevelam (12%) or low-dose atorvastatin (38%) alone (P<0.01), but similar to those achieved with atorvastatin 80 mg/day (53%). Total cholesterol decreased 6-39% in all active treatment groups (P<0.05). High density lipoprotein cholesterol increased significantly for all groups including placebo (P<0.05). Triglycerides decreased in patients taking atorvastatin alone (P<0.05), but were unaffected by colesevelam alone or in combination. The frequency of side effects did not differ among groups. At recommended starting doses of each agent, coadministration of colesevelam and atorvastatin was well tolerated, efficacious and produced additive LDL cholesterol reductions comparable to those observed with the maximum atorvastatin dose.

Comparison of the efficacy of atorvastatin versus cerivastatin in primary hypercholesterolemia.

This 6-week Prospective, Randomized, Open-label Blinded End point (PROBE) study conducted at 12 sites in the United States compared the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin with cerivastatin. In all, 215 hypercholesterolemic patients (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol > or = 160 mg/dl [4.14 mmol/L]; triglycerides < or = 400 mg/dl [4.52 mmol/L]) were randomized to receive either atorvastatin 10 mg once daily (n = 108) or cerivastatin 0.3 mg once daily (n = 107). Efficacy was assessed by measuring changes from baseline in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and triglycerides. Atorvastatin produced significantly greater (p < 0.0001) reductions from baseline to week 6 in LDL cholesterol (37.7% vs 30.2%), total cholesterol (27.5% vs 22.2%), and apolipoprotein B (28.6% vs 21.2%), and a significantly greater (p < 0.05) increase from baseline to week 6 in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (6.8% vs 4.3%) than cerivastatin. Atorvastatin treatment was also associated with a greater percent decrease from baseline to week 6 in triglycerides, with a trend toward statistical significance (p = 0.0982). The percentage of patients that achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program LDL cholesterol goal was greater for those receiving atorvastatin (73%) than for those receiving cerivastatin (66%). The proportion of patients experiencing drug-attributable adverse events, which were mostly mild to moderate and related to the digestive system, was significantly less (p < 0.05) with atorvastatin (5%) than with cerivastatin (14%) treatment. In conclusion, atorvastatin (10 mg/day) is more effective at lowering LDL cholesterol in hypercholesterolemic patients than cerivastatin (0.3 mg/day). Both atorvastatin and cerivastatin are well tolerated, with safety profiles similar to other members of the statin class.

Efficacy and short-term safety of a new ACAT inhibitor, avasimibe, on lipids, lipoproteins, and apolipoproteins, in patients with combined hyperlipidemia.

Although acyl-CoA:cholesterol acyltransferase (ACAT) inhibitors have been shown to reduce lipid levels in several animal models, the safety and lipid modifying activity of any single agent in this class has not been demonstrated in humans. The safety and efficacy of avasimibe (CI-1011), a new, unique, wholly synthetic ACAT inhibitor, was evaluated in the treatment of 130 men and women with combined hyperlipidemia and hypoalphalipoproteinemia (low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C]). Following an 8-week placebo and dietary-controlled baseline period, patients were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with placebo, 50, 125, 250, or 500 mg avasimibe administered as capsules once daily for 8 weeks. At all evaluated doses, avasimibe treatment resulted in prompt and significant reductions (P<0.05) in plasma levels of total triglycerides (TG) and very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C) with mean reductions of up to 23% and 30% respectively, apparently independent of dose. No statistically significant changes in total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), HDL-C or apolipoprotein (apo) B were detected. ApoAI levels were also unchanged on all doses of avasimibe apart from the 500 mg dosage, which was associated with a significant decrease in plasma apoAI. The relevance of this latter finding in only one dosage group is not known. All doses of avasimibe were well tolerated with no resulting significant abnormalities of biochemical, hematological, or clinical parameters.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of atorvastatin (10mg) with simvastatin (10mg) at six weeks. ASSET Investigators.

The 6-week efficacy and safety of atorvastatin versus simvastatin was determined during a 54-week, open-label, multicenter, parallel-arm, treat-to-target study. In all, 1,424 patients with mixed dyslipidemia (triglyceride 200 to 600 mg/dl [2.26 to 6.77 mmol/L]) were stratified to 1 of 2 groups (diabetes or no diabetes). Patients were then randomized to receive either atorvastatin 10 mg/ day (n = 730) or simvastatin 10 mg/day (n = 694). Efficacy was determined by measuring changes from baseline in lipid parameters including low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and apolipoprotein B. Compared with simvastatin, atorvastatin produced significantly greater (p < 0.0001) reductions from baseline in LDL cholesterol (37.2% vs 29.6%), total cholesterol (27.6% vs 21.5%), triglycerides (22.1% vs 16.0%), the ratio of LDL cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (41.1% vs 33.7%), and apolipoprotein B (28.3% vs 21.2%), and a comparable increase from baseline in HDL cholesterol (7.4% vs 6.9%). Atorvastatin was also significantly (p < 0.0001) more effective than simvastatin at treating the overall patient population to LDL cholesterol goals (55.6% vs 38.4%). Fewer than 6% of patients in either treatment group experienced drug-attributable adverse events, which were mostly mild to moderate in nature. Diabetic patients treated with either statin had safety characteristics similar to nondiabetics, with atorvastatin exhibiting superior efficacy to simvastatin. In conclusion, atorvastatin, at a dose of 10 mg/day, is more effective than simvastatin 10 mg/day at lowering lipids and reaching LDL cholesterol goals in patients with mixed dyslipidemia. Both statins are well tolerated with safety profiles similar to other members of the statin class.

Efficacy and safety of cerivastatin 0.8 mg in patients with hypercholesterolaemia: the pivotal placebo-controlled clinical trial. Cerivastatin Study Group.

This pivotal, multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group study evaluated the efficacy and safety of cerivastatin 0.8 mg. Patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia were randomized, after 10 weeks' dietary stabilization on an American Heart Association (AHA) Step I diet, to treatment with cerivastatin 0.8 mg (n = 776), cerivastatin 0.4 mg (n = 195) or placebo (n = 199) once daily for 8 weeks. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg reduced mean low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) by 41.8% compared with cerivastatin 0.4 mg (-35.6%, P < 0.0001) or placebo. In 90% of patients receiving cerivastatin 0.8 mg LDL-C was reduced by 23.9 -58.4% (6th - 95th percentile). Overall attainment of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goal was achieved by 84% of patients receiving cerivastatin 0.8 mg and by 59% of those with coronary heart disease (CHD). In the sub-population meeting the NCEP criteria for pharmacological therapy for LDL-C reduction, 74.6% of patients, including the 59% with CHD, reached the goal with cerivastatin 0.8 mg. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg also reduced mean total cholesterol by 29.9%, apolipoprotein B by 33.2% and median triglycerides by 22.9% (all P < 0.0001). Mean high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein A1 were elevated 8.7% (P < 0.0001) and 4.5% (P < 0.0001), respectively, by cerivastatin 0.8 mg. Reductions of triglyceride and elevation in HDL-C were dependent upon triglyceride baseline levels; in patients having baseline triglyceride levels 250 - 400 mg/dl, cerivastatin 0.8 mg reduced median triglycerides by 29.5% and elevated HDL-C by 13.2%. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg was well tolerated. The most commonly reported adverse events included headache, pharyngitis and rhinitis (4 - 6%). Symptomatic creatine kinase elevations > 10 times upper limit of normal occurred in 0%, 1% and 0.9% of patients receiving placebo, cerivastatin 0.4 mg or cerivastatin 0.8 mg, respectively. Cerivastatin 0.8 mg is an effective and safe treatment for patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia who need aggressive LDL-C lowering in order to achieve NCEP-recommended levels.

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.

Long-term blood cholesterol-lowering effects of a dietary fiber supplement.

BACKGROUND: The study evaluated the blood cholesterol-lowering effects of a dietary supplement of water-soluble fibers (guar gum, pectin) and mostly non-water-soluble fibers (soy fiber, pea fiber, corn bran) in subjects with mild to moderate hypercholesterolemia (LDL cholesterol, 3.37-4.92 mmol/L). METHODS: After stabilization for 9 weeks on a National Cholesterol Education Program Step 1 Diet, subjects were randomly assigned to receive 20 g/d of the fiber supplement (n = 87) or matching placebo (n = 82) for 15 weeks and then receive the fiber supplement for 36 weeks. The efficacy analyses included the 125 subjects (58 fiber; 67 placebo) who were treatment and diet compliant. One hundred two (52 fiber; 50 placebo) completed the 15-week comparative phase. Of these subjects 85 (45 fiber; 40 placebo) elected to continue in the 36-week noncomparative extension phase. RESULTS: The mean decreases during the 15-week period for LDL cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and LDL-C/HDL-C ratio were greater (P < 0.001) in the fiber group. The mean changes from pre-treatment values in LDL-C, TC, and LDL-C/HDL-C ratio for subjects in the fiber group were -0.51 mmol/L (-12.1%), -0.53 mmol/L (-8.5%), and -0.30 (-9.4%), respectively. The corresponding changes in the placebo group were -0.05 mmol/L (-1.3%), -0.05 mmol/L (-0.8%), and 0.05 (1.5%), respectively. The fiber supplement had no significant effects (P > 0.05) on HDL cholesterol (HDL-C), triglyceride, iron, ferritin, or vitamin A or E levels. Similar effects were seen over the subsequent 36-week noncomparative part of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The fiber supplement provided significant and sustained reductions in LDL-C without reducing HDL-C or increasing triglycerides over the 51-week treatment period.

Clinical efficacy and safety of cerivastatin: summary of pivotal phase IIb/III studies.

Cerivastatin is a new, third-generation 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor ("statin"), which is administered to hypercholesterolemic patients at doses equivalent to 1-3% of the doses of other statins. This report reviews the pivotal Phase IIb/III clinical trials in which the efficacy and safety of cerivastatin was compared with placebo and active comparator statins (lovastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin) after both short- and long-term administration. Overall, the studies showed that at doses of 0.025-0.4 mg/day, cerivastatin produced dose-dependent reductions in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and total cholesterol, which were significantly greater than placebo. The greatest reductions were achieved with 0.4 mg/day cerivastatin. On this dose, >40% of patients achieved reductions in LDL cholesterol >40% and in a further 9% of patients, LDL cholesterol was decreased by >50%. At higher doses, cerivastatin also demonstrated potent triglyceride-lowering effects in a subgroup of patients with raised plasma triglycerides. Reductions in atherogenic lipids and lipoproteins were accompanied by significant increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, apolipoprotein A-I, and antiatherogenic lipoprotein A-I. Long-term administration of cerivastatin for periods of up to 2 years was associated with persistent reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and apolipoprotein B as well as increases in HDL cholesterol similar to those observed after initial administration. Long-term cerivastatin treatment was also well tolerated. There was no significant difference between the incidence of adverse effects with cerivastatin and comparator statins or between cerivastatin and other statins with respect to clinically significant increases in either hepatic enzymes or creatine phosphokinase. In conclusion, these studies indicate that cerivastatin is a safe and effective long-term treatment for patients with primary hypercholesterolemia and also suggest that higher doses should be investigated.

Fat-gram counting and food-record rating are equally effective for evaluating food records in reduced-fat diets.

OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of adherence to low-fat diets using food-record rating and fat-gram counting, to evaluate dietary adherence using the fat-gram counting method, and to assess correlations between food-record rating and fat-gram counting. DESIGN: A diet monitoring and observation study was conducted to compare the effectiveness of food-record rating and fat-gram counting to evaluate dietary adherence. Subjects were randomly assigned to the food-record rating group of the fat-gram counting group. Each participant was asked to complete four 3-day food records. Food records were evaluated by food-record rating for one group and by fat-gram counting for the other. Each record was then scored using the alternate system. For a subset, manually calculated fat-gram values were compared for accuracy with values from the Nutrient Data Systems database. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Mantel-Haenszel chi 2, regression, and K analyses were used to evaluate adherence rates and within-subject agreement between fat-gram counting and food-record rating. SUBJECTS/SETTING: Seventy-eight participants were recruited from a lipid-lowering research trial conducted in Houston, Tex. RESULTS: Strong correlations were found between fat-gram values calculated manually and those calculated using the Nutrient Data Systems. No significant differences in adherence rates were found between the food-record rating and fat-gram counting groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fat-gram counting is at least as effective as food-record rating in monitoring dietary fat content. Dietitians can use it as an alternative dietary fat-monitoring procedure for clinical practice and research.

The problem of compliance to cholesterol altering therapy.

This review's purpose is to describe for the practicing clinician the current knowledge about patient compliance to cholesterol-altering drugs and about procedures for compliance management applicable to clinical practice in the United States. Compliance is defined for four commonly measured major steps and, based on recent electronic monitoring data, for three quantitative categories of active medication-taking. The concepts and definition of compliance are undergoing evolutionary changes due to the measurement and availability of new dimensions through electronic monitoring of patient compliance. Substantial non-compliance to cholesterol-altering drugs has been reported in nine large clinical trials for primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease, in two HMOs, and, using electronic monitoring of compliance, in one clinical trial and a selected practice. The risks of treatment discontinuation increased continuously during treatment and totaled from 6 to 30% after 5 years. Patterns of day-to-day partial compliance are emerging. Procedures and knowledge for clinical management of compliance are described including methods of measuring compliance, risk factors for non-compliance, standards for compliance performance, epidemiology of compliance, procedures for managing compliance at the start of therapy and for addressing compliance problems during established treatment, simple office assessment of compliance by brief interview questions, compliance aids, prediction of compliance, and education and training of medical-care personnel in compliance management.

Levels of soluble cell adhesion molecules in patients with dyslipidemia.

BACKGROUND: Increased expression of cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) on the vascular endothelium has been postulated to play an important role in atherogenesis. Both in vitro and in vivo studies have suggested that dyslipidemia may increase expression of CAMs. METHODS AND RESULTS: To determine whether dyslipidemia is associated with increased expression of CAMs, we examined the levels of soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (sICAM-1), soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (sVCAM-1), and soluble E-selectin (sE-selectin) in individuals with either hypercholesterolemia or hypertriglyceridemia and in control subjects matched for age and sex. Patients with hypertriglyceridemia had significantly higher levels of sVCAM-1 (739 +/- 69 ng/mL) compared with patients with hypercholesterolemia (552 +/- 63 ng/mL) and control subjects (480 +/- 56 ng/mL). Levels of sICAM-1 were significantly increased in both the hypercholesterolemic and hypertriglyceridemic groups (298 +/- 29 and 342 +/- 31 ng/mL, respectively) compared with the control group (198 +/- 14 ng/mL). Levels of sE-selectin were significantly increased in hypercholesterolemic patients (74 +/- 9 ng/mL) compared with control subjects (48 +/- 5 ng/mL). Ten hypercholesterolemic patients were treated aggressively with atorvastatin alone or a combination of colestipol and either atorvastatin or simvastatin for a mean of 42 weeks and had an average LDL cholesterol reduction of 51%. Comparison of soluble CAMs before and after treatment showed a significant reduction only in sE-selectin (77 +/- 11 versus 56 +/- 6 ng/mL, P < or = .03) but not for sVCAM-1 or sICAM-1. CONCLUSIONS: Although severe hyperlipidemia is associated with increased levels of soluble CAMs, aggressive lipid-lowering treatment had only limited effects on the levels. Increased levels of soluble CAMs in patients with hyperlipidemia may be a marker for atherosclerosis.

A definition of advanced types of atherosclerotic lesions and a histological classification of atherosclerosis. A report from the Committee on Vascular Lesions of the Council on Arteriosclerosis, American Heart Association.

This report is the continuation of two earlier reports that defined human arterial intima and precursors of advanced atherosclerotic lesions in humans. This report describes the characteristic components and pathogenic mechanisms of the various advanced atherosclerotic lesions. These, with the earlier definitions of precursor lesions, led to the histological classification of human atherosclerotic lesions found in the second part of this report. The Committee on Vascular Lesions also attempted to correlate the appearance of lesions noted in clinical imaging studies with histological lesion types and corresponding clinical syndromes. In the histological classification, lesions are designated by Roman numerals, which indicate the usual sequence of lesion progression. The initial (type 1) lesion contains enough atherogenic lipoprotein to elicit an increase in macrophages and formation of scattered macrophage foam cells. As in subsequent lesion types, the changes are more marked in locations of arteries with adaptive intimal thickening. (Adaptive thickenings, which are present at constant locations in everyone from birth, do not obstruct the lumen and represent adaptations to local mechanical forces). Type II lesions consist primarily of layers of macrophage foam cells and lipid-laden smooth muscle cells and include lesions grossly designated as fatty streaks. Type III is the intermediate stage between type II and type IV (atheroma, a lesion that is potentially symptom-producing). In addition to the lipid-laden cells of type II, type III lesions contain scattered collections of extracellular lipid droplets and particles that disrupt the coherence of some intimal smooth muscle cells. This extracellular lipid is the immediate precursor of the larger, confluent, and more disruptive core of extracellular lipid that characterizes type IV lesions. Beginning around the fourth decade of life, lesions that usually have a lipid core may also contain thick layers of fibrous connective tissue (type V lesion) and/or fissure, hematoma, and thrombus (type VI lesion). Some type V lesions are largely calcified (type Vb), and some consist mainly of fibrous connective tissue and little or no accumulated lipid or calcium (type Vc).

A definition of advanced types of atherosclerotic lesions and a histological classification of atherosclerosis. A report from the Committee on Vascular Lesions of the Council on Arteriosclerosis, American Heart Association.

This report is the continuation of two earlier reports that defined human arterial intima and precursors of advanced atherosclerotic lesions in humans. This report describes the characteristic components and pathogenic mechanisms of the various advanced atherosclerotic lesions. These, with the earlier definitions of precursor lesions, led to the histological classification of human atherosclerotic lesions found in the second part of this report. The Committee on Vascular Lesions also attempted to correlate the appearance of lesions noted in clinical imaging studies with histological lesion types and corresponding clinical syndromes. In the histological classification, lesions are designated by Roman numerals, which indicate the usual sequence of lesions progression. The initial (type I) lesion contains enough atherogenic lipoprotein to elicit an increase in macrophages and formation of scattered macrophage foam cells. As in subsequent lesion types, the changes are more marked in locations of arteries with adaptive intimal thickening. (Adaptive thickenings, which are present at constant locations in everyone from birth, do not obstruct the lumen and represent adaptations to local mechanical forces). Type II lesions consist primarily of layers of macrophage foam cells and lipid-laden smooth muscle cells and include lesions grossly designated as fatty streaks. Type III is the intermediate stage between type II and type IV (atheroma, a lesion that is potentially symptom-producing). In addition to the lipid-laden cells of type II, type III lesions contain scattered collections of extracellular lipid droplets and particles that disrupt the coherence of some intimal smooth muscle cells. This extracellular lipid is the immediate precursor of the larger, confluent, and more disruptive core of extracellular lipid that characterizes type IV lesions. Beginning around the fourth decade of life, lesions that usually have a lipid core may also contain thick layers of fibrous connective tissue (type V lesion) and/or fissure, hematoma, and thrombus (type VI lesion). Some type V lesions are largely calcified (type Vb), and some consist mainly of fibrous connective tissue and little or no accumulated lipid or calcium (type Vc).

The effects of colestipol tablets compared with colestipol granules on plasma cholesterol and other lipids in moderately hypercholesterolemic patients.

The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare the efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability of a new formulation of colestipol, colestipol tablets (T), with those of colestipol granules (G), in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. Three hundred and seventeen patients with primary hypercholesterolemia who were following a low-fat, low-cholesterol diet (NCEP Step I diet), and had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels > or = 4.14 mmol/l (160 mg/dl) and < or = 6.46 mmol/l (250 mg/dl) were studied. Study medication was taken twice a day, with breakfast and supper, for 8 weeks. The six parallel treatment groups consisted of colestipol tablets 2 g b.i.d. and 8 g b.i.d., matching placebo tablets b.i.d., colestipol granules 2 g b.i.d. and 8 g b.i.d., and matching placebo granules b.i.d.. Study endpoints included absolute change and percentage change from baseline in selected lipid, lipoprotein, and apolipoprotein measurements; LDL-C lowering was the primary efficacy endpoint. Treatment with colestipol tablets and colestipol granules resulted in virtually identical, statistically significant (P < or = 0.05) reductions of LDL-C, total cholesterol (TC), TC/HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B (apo B). Compared with placebo, all active treatments (tablets 4 g/day, tablets 16 g/day, granules 4 g/day, granules 16 g/day) significantly reduced LDL-C (12%, 24%, 12%, 25%, respectively), TC (7%, 15%, 8%, 15%, respectively), TC/HDL-C (8%, 14%, 9%, 15%, respectively) and apo B (12%, 20%, 13%, 22%, respectively). All active treatments significantly increased lipoprotein particle AI (LpAI) (5%, 23%, 14%, 18%, respectively). VLDL-C and triglycerides increased significantly in the high-dose groups. The proportions of patients reporting adverse events, largely gastrointestinal-related, were not different among the active treatment groups. The treatments were well-tolerated, and no drug-related serious adverse events were reported. Patients experienced with granule medication prior to this study preferred tablets over granules. This study demonstrates that colestipol tablets are an effective treatment to reduce LDL-C in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia, are equivalent to colestipol granules, are well-tolerated, and are preferred over granules by patients.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily vs twice-daily dosing with fluvastatin, a synthetic reductase inhibitor, in primary hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND: Fluvastatin sodium is a new, entirely synthetic 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor that may be an effective lipid-lowering agent in patients whose hyperlipidemia does not respond to dietary therapy. We conducted a study to evaluate the effects of fluvastatin on lipoprotein levels in subjects with primary hypercholesterolemia and to compare the efficacy and safety of two fluvastatin sodium dosing regimens: 20 mg once daily vs 10 mg twice daily. DESIGN: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial involving 207 patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels of 4.15 mmol/L (160 mg/dL) or higher despite dietary intervention and with triglyceride levels of 3.38 mmol/L or lower. Three parallel treatment groups received 6 weeks of treatment with 20 mg of fluvastatin sodium once daily, 10 mg of fluvastatin sodium twice daily, or a placebo. RESULTS: Total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were reduced from baseline by 16% and 22%, respectively, with 20 mg of fluvastatin sodium once daily (P < .001) and by 17% and 23%, respectively, with 10 mg of fluvastatin sodium twice daily (P < .001). Fluvastatin was well tolerated, and there were no serious clinical or biochemical adverse events ascribable to the drug. CONCLUSIONS: Fluvastatin therapy demonstrated excellent short-term safety and efficacy in reducing total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Fluvastatin sodium, the first totally synthetic 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor to be used in clinical trials, appears to be both effective and well tolerated at 20 mg/d, given in either a single or divided dose.

Plasma lipid effects of three common vegetable oils in reduced-fat diets of free-living adults.

We compared plasma lipid changes due to the polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in partially hydrogenated soybean oil, corn oil, and sunflower oil fed in reduced-fat diets (22-26% of total energy). Each oil was the dominant fat in isoenergetic diets of centrally prepared foods consumed by 26 male and 35 female normolipidemic, free-living individuals. Test diets were consumed double-blind, alternating with self-selected diets for 5 wk each. The ranges of proportions of total fat were: 4.7-9.7% polyunsaturated fat, 8.9-14.2% monounsaturated fat and 5.4-7.4% saturated fat. All three diets lowered (P < 0.0001) total cholesterol (11%), LDL cholesterol (13%), and HDL cholesterol (10%), without triglyceride changes. We conclude that PUFAs at approximately 6% of total energy result in clinically relevant plasma cholesterol-lowering and that the proportion of polyunsaturated fat must be an important consideration when planning reduced-fat, reduced-saturated-fat diets.