Extended-release niacin vs gemfibrozil for the treatment of low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Niaspan-Gemfibrozil Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a direct comparison of agents that raise plasma levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) to help devise strategies for coronary risk reduction. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, we compared the effects of extended-release niacin (Niaspan), at doses increased sequentially from 1000 to 2000 mg at bedtime, with those of gemfibrozil, 600 mg given twice daily, in raising low levels of HDL-C. Enrollment criteria included an HDL-C level of 1.03 mmol/L or less (< or =40 mg/dL), a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of 4.14 mmol/L or less (< or =160 mg/dL) or less than 3.36 mmol/L (<130 mg/dL) with atherosclerotic disease, and a triglyceride level of 4.52 mmol/L or less (< or =400 mg/dL). RESULTS: Among 173 patients, 72 (82%) of the 88 assigned to Niaspan treatment and 68 (80%) of the 85 assigned to gemfibrozil treatment completed the study. Niaspan, at 1500 and 2000 mg, vs gemfibrozil raised the HDL-C level more (21% and 26%, respectively, vs 13%), raised the apolipoprotein A-I level more (9% and 11% vs 4%), reduced the total cholesterol-HDL-C ratio more (-17% and -22% vs -12%), reduced the lipoprotein(a) level (-7% and -20% vs no change), and had no adverse effect on the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level (2% and 0% change vs a 9% increase). Significance levels for comparisons between medications ranged from P<.001 to P<.02. Gemfibrozil reduced the triglyceride level more than Niaspan (P<.001 to P = .06, -40% for gemfibrozil vs -16% to -29% for Niaspan, 1000 to 2000 mg). Effects on plasma fibrinogen levels were significantly favorable for Niaspan compared with gemfibrozil (P<.02), as gemfibrozil increased the fibrinogen level (from 5% to 9%) and Niaspan tended to decrease the fibrinogen level (from -1% to -6%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a low baseline HDL-C level, Niaspan at its higher doses provided up to 2-fold greater HDL-C increases, decreases in lipoprotein(a), improvements in lipoprotein cholesterol ratios, and lower fibrinogen levels compared with gemfibrozil. Gemfibrozil gave a greater triglyceride reduction but also increased the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level, which did not occur with Niaspan.

Influence of baseline lipids on effectiveness of pravastatin in the CARE Trial. Cholesterol And Recurrent Events.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the influence of baseline lipid levels on coronary event rates and the effectiveness of pravastatin therapy in the Cholesterol And Recurrent Events (CARE) study. BACKGROUND: The CARE study cohort provided a relatively unique opportunity to examine the relation between lipid levels and clinical events in a post-myocardial infarction (MI) population with relatively low cholesterol and low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol values. METHODS: There were 4,159 patients with a previous infarct and a total cholesterol level <240 mg/dl, LDL cholesterol level 115 to 174 mg/dl and triglyceride level <350 mg/dl randomly allocated to placebo (n=2,078) or pravastatin 40 mg/day (n=2,081). Time to either coronary death or nonfatal MI (primary end point) or to the secondary end point, which included undergoing a coronary revascularization procedure, was determined as a function of baseline lipids (total, LDL, high density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol and triglyceride levels). RESULTS: Quartile analysis indicated important effects for LDL cholesterol, in which a higher LDL was associated with greater cardiac event rates (in the placebo group, every 25-mg/dl increment in LDL was associated with a 28% increased risk [5% to 56%, p=0.015]) in the primary event. The differential event rates with respect to baseline LDL cholesterol for placebo and pravastatin groups reduced the difference in clinical outcomes at lower LDL cholesterol levels. In both the placebo and pravastatin groups, an inverse relation between baseline HDL cholesterol and cardiac events was observed (10 mg/dl lower baseline HDL cholesterol level was associated with a 10% [0% to 19%, p=0.046] increase in coronary death or nonfatal MI). CONCLUSIONS: Within the LDL cholesterol levels in CARE (115 to 174 mg/dl), baseline values influenced both the risk of events in the placebo group as well as the clinical effectiveness of pravastatin therapy.

Relationship between plasma LDL concentrations during treatment with pravastatin and recurrent coronary events in the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events trial.

BACKGROUND: Although LDL lowering has been shown to reduce recurrent coronary events in patients with coronary heart disease, little direct information is available on the extent of LDL lowering required to achieve this outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) trial compared pravastatin and placebo in patients who had experienced myocardial infarction (MI) who had average concentrations of total cholesterol <240 mg/dL (baseline mean, 209 mg/dL) and LDL cholesterol (LDL) 115 to 174 mg/dL (mean, 139 mg/dL). Pravastatin reduced coronary death or recurrent MI by 24%. In multivariate analysis, the LDL concentration achieved during follow-up was a significant, although nonlinear, predictor of the coronary event rate (P=.007), whereas the extent of LDL reduction was not significant, whether expressed as an absolute amount (P=.97) or a percentage (P=.76). The coronary event rate declined as LDL decreased during follow-up from 174 to approximately 125 mg/dL, but no further decline was seen in the LDL range from 125 to 71 mg/dL. In multivariate analysis, triglyceride but not HDL concentrations during follow-up were weakly but significantly associated with the coronary event rate. CONCLUSIONS: The LDL concentrations achieved during treatment with pravastatin or placebo were associated with reduction in coronary events down to an LDL concentration of approximately 125 mg/dL. LDL concentrations <125 mg/dL during treatment were not associated with further benefit. Absolute or percentage reduction in LDL had little relationship to coronary events.

Meeting national cholesterol education goals in clinical practice--a comparison of lovastatin and fluvastatin in primary prevention.

The available clinical data for 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors demonstrate their efficacy and safety in treating hypercholesterolemia and improving long-term morbidity and mortality related to coronary artery disease. Comparative studies among agents in this class support the general perception that, at the most commonly prescribed doses, all these drugs reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels by about 20-30%. The primary measure of efficacy in the current study was the percentage of patients achieving goal levels for LDL cholesterol of < 160 mg/dL, as proposed by the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP). This study compares the most widely prescribed agent in this class, lovastatin, with the newest agent, fluvastatin. Patients enrolled had previously been satisfactorily treated with lovastatin 20 mg every evening. Following a placebo washout period, patients were randomized to receive lovastatin 20 mg with the evening meal (69 patients) or fluvastatin 20 mg at bedtime (68 patients) for 4 weeks of open-label therapy. In a second 4-week period, patients on lovastatin continued on the initial dosage while patients receiving fluvastatin had their daily dosage increased to 40 mg at bedtime to evaluate the range of efficacy from 20-40 mg/day. In both treatment arms, the majority of patients achieved the goal lipid level. Approximately 85% of patients on fluvastatin 20 mg and 90% of patients on lovastatin 20 mg achieved the goal within 4 weeks. This small difference was not statistically significant. Increasing the dosage to 40 mg at bedtime in the fluvastatin arm produced goal LDL cholesterol levels in about 90% of patients. Both agents were well tolerated; no patients discontinued therapy because of adverse events.

Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study results: two-year efficacy and safety follow-up.

The Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and diet-controlled multicenter trial, evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of lovastatin over 48 weeks in 8,245 patients with moderately severe hypercholesterolemia. During year 1 of follow-up of the full cohort, lovastatin at 20 or 40 mg/day, or 20 or 40 mg twice daily, produced dose-dependent decreases in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (24% to 40%) and triglyceride levels (10% to 19%), and increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (6.6% to 9.5%). In all, 977 patients continued their original blinded treatment for an additional year. In year 2, the LDL cholesterol response to lovastatin was maintained, the triglyceride reductions were somewhat less, and the increases in HDL cholesterol were moderately greater than in year 1. Successive transaminase elevations > 3 times the upper limit of normal were observed in only 1 patient in year 2, yielding a cumulative 2-year incidence of from 0.1% (placebo or lovastatin 20 mg/day) to 1.9% (lovastatin 80 mg/day). Myopathy occurred in only 1 patient during year 2, and over the 2-year study was observed rarely and only at lovastatin dosages of 40 and 80 mg/day. This study indicates that lovastatin maintains its efficacy over long-term follow-up, particularly in effectively lowering LDL cholesterol, is generally well tolerated, and has a favorable safety profile.

Double-blind evaluation of the dose-response relationship of amlodipine in essential hypertension.

To determine the dose-response efficacy of once-daily administration of placebo or a new long-acting calcium channel blocker amlodipine in patients with mild to moderate hypertension, a randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial was conducted. The study included 210 patients with diastolic hypertension (blood pressure 95 to 114 mm Hg) without major hematologic, renal, hepatic, cardiac, or endocrine abnormalities. After a 4-week single-blind placebo run-in period, patients were given placebo or amlodipine (1.25, 2.5, 5, or 10 mg) daily for 4 weeks. To assess the antihypertensive effect of amlodipine over a 24-hour period, blood pressure and pulse rate at weeks 0 and 4 were recorded for 12 hours after the dose and then again at 24 hours. At the end of the study patients treated with all doses of amlodipine greater than 1.25 mg daily had significantly reduced diastolic blood pressure in both supine and standing than 1.25 mg daily had significantly reduced diastolic blood pressure in both supine and standing positions. Amlodipine, 1.25 mg daily, was also associated with a decrease in standing diastolic blood pressure. Response to treatment was greater in all amlodipine-treated patients than in those receiving placebo. Pulse rate in both the supine and standing positions was not significantly affected by amlodipine. At doses of 2.5, 5.0, or 10.0 mg daily, amlodipine maintained blood pressure below values obtained with placebo throughout the 24-hour period. Treatment with amlodipine was well tolerated and the incidence of side effects was low.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Efficacy and tolerability of lovastatin in 3390 women with moderate hypercholesterolemia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lovastatin in women with moderate hypercholesterolemia. DESIGN: The Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) Study, a multicenter, double-blind, diet- and placebo-controlled trial, in which participants were randomly assigned to receive placebo or lovastatin at doses of 20 or 40 mg once daily, or 20 or 40 mg twice daily for 48 weeks. SETTING: Ambulatory patients recruited by 362 participating centers throughout the United States. PATIENTS: Women (n = 3390) from the total cohort of 8245 volunteers. MEASUREMENTS: Plasma total, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and triglycerides; and laboratory and clinical evidence of adverse events monitored periodically throughout the study. RESULTS: Among women, lovastatin (20 to 80 mg/d) produced sustained (12- to 48-week), dose-related changes (P < 0.001): decreases in LDL cholesterol (24% to 40%) and triglycerides (9% to 18%), and increases in HDL cholesterol (6.7% to 8.6%). Depending on the dose, from 82% to 95% of lovastatin-treated women achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program goal of LDL cholesterol levels less than 4.14 mmol/L (160 mg/dL), and 40% to 87% achieved the goal of 3.36 mmol/L (130 mg/dL). Successive transaminase elevations greater than three times the upper limit of normal occurred in 0.1% of women and were dose dependent above the 20-mg dose. Myopathy, defined as muscle symptoms with creatine kinase elevations greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal, was rare and associated with the highest recommended daily dose of lovastatin (80 mg). Estrogen-replacement therapy appeared to have no effect on either the efficacy or safety profile of lovastatin. CONCLUSION: Lovastatin is highly effective and generally well tolerated as therapy for primary hypercholesterolemia in women.

Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study results. Effect of patient characteristics on lovastatin-induced changes in plasma concentrations of lipids and lipoproteins.

BACKGROUND: Lovastatin produces consistent dose-related reductions in plasma levels of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol along with variable decreases in triglycerides and increases in high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. Patient characteristics from the Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study were examined to determine their association with the magnitude of lovastatin-induced changes in these lipids and lipoproteins. METHODS AND RESULTS: After a baseline period consisting of dietary therapy, 8,245 patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia were randomized to five groups that received 48 weeks of treatment with either placebo or daily doses of lovastatin ranging from 20 to 80 mg. By use of linear statistical models, 20 different patient characteristics were examined for modification of the dose-dependent responses observed. For LDL cholesterol, the following were associated with enhanced lowering (p less than 0.05; percent changes are placebo-corrected, adjusted mean changes from baseline for the 80-mg/day lovastatin group): full drug compliance (-41.9%) versus 80% compliance (-20.3%); an age of 65 (-43.4%) versus 45 years (-38.1%) for women; white race (-40.9%) versus black race (-38.0%); and 4.5-kg weight gain (-42.6%) versus 4.5-kg weight loss (-37.9%). Similar relations for enhanced triglyceride lowering were found with older age and weight gain. Patients with initially low HDL cholesterol (less than 0.91 mmol/l) and high triglycerides (greater than 2.26 mmol/l) had enhanced responses for these parameters: placebo-corrected percent changes at 80 mg/day were -27.4% for triglycerides and +12.3% for HDL cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patient characteristics had very little impact of clinical importance on the dose-dependent LDL cholesterol lowering found with lovastatin. In patients with initially high levels of triglycerides and low levels of HDL cholesterol, the elevation of HDL cholesterol produced by lovastatin appears to be enhanced.

Comparative properties of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors: relations with inhibition of tissue angiotensin-converting enzyme and potential clinical implications.

This review summarizes the evidence indicating that local synthesis of angiotensin II, and interference with this process by inhibition of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE), may be important in the treatment of hypertension. Inhibition of tissue converting enzyme generally has a stronger correlation with the hemodynamic effects of ACE inhibitors than inhibition of ACE in plasma. Reported differences in the ability of ACE inhibitors to penetrate tissues and to bind to the converting enzyme may be closely related to the relative lipophilicity of these agents. Finally, correlation of data from clinical studies with results provided by laboratory experimentation suggests that the efficacy of different ACE inhibitors in hypertensive patients may be predicted from differences among the actions of these drugs in vitro and in whole animals.

Expanded clinical evaluation of lovastatin (EXCEL) study results: III. Efficacy in modifying lipoproteins and implications for managing patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia.

In the multicenter, double-blind EXCEL (Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin) study the efficacy of lovastatin in modifying plasma lipids and lipoproteins in 8,245 participants with moderate primary hypercholesterolemia was evaluated. Patients were randomly assigned to 48 weeks of treatment with diet and placebo or diet and lovastatin 20 or 40 mg once a day, or 20 or 40 mg twice a day. At all of these dosages, lovastatin produced substantial dose-dependent reductions in low-density-lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol levels, averaging 24% (20 mg/day) to 40% (80 mg/day). The magnitude of the effect of this lipoprotein was further reflected by the percentage of patients who achieved National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goals. In the absence of coronary artery disease (CAD) or two other CAD risk factors, the LDL-cholesterol goal of 4.14 mmol/L (160 mg/dL) was attained by 22% of patients in the placebo group and between 81% (20 mg/day) and 96% (80 mg/day) of those treated with lovastatin. For those with CAD or at least two other CAD risk factors, the LDL-cholesterol goal of 3.36 mmol/L (130 mg/dL) was attained by 4% of placebo patients and between 38% (20 mg/day) and 83% (80 mg/day) of those treated with lovastatin. Lovastatin also increased high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (7-10%) and decreased triglycerides (10-19%) in a dose-dependent manner. Thus, when used as an adjunct to a prudent diet, lovastatin produces favorable changes in the entire lipoprotein profile and is a highly effective agent for managing patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.

Expanded clinical evaluation of lovastatin (EXCEL) study results: IV. Additional perspectives on the tolerability of lovastatin.

This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, diet-and-placebo-controlled study was designed to clarify the dose-response relationship of lovastatin therapy to lipid-modifying efficacy and drug-related adverse events. Exclusion criteria were minimized so that study patients were representative of the majority of patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia seen in medical practice. After 6 weeks on the American Heart Association Step 1 Diet, a total of 8,245 patients were randomly assigned to 48 weeks of treatment with diet and placebo or lovastatin at dosages of 20 or 40 mg once a day or 20 or 40 mg twice a day. All adverse events were monitored, with particular attention to evaluation of liver and muscle. Liver transaminase elevations suggestive of possible hepatotoxicity, defined as successive elevations in either aspartate transaminase or alanine aminotransferase greater than 3 times the upper limit of normal, occurred in equal numbers of placebo and lovastatin 20 mg/day treated patients (0.1%). The frequencies were higher in lovastatin 40 mg/day and 80 mg/day patient groups (0.9 and 1.5%, respectively). No patient was diagnosed as having clinically symptomatic hepatic dysfunction. Creatinine kinase (CK) elevations above the upper limit of normal occurred frequently in placebo- (29%), as well as lovastatin-treated patients (29-35%), and muscle symptoms were reported with similar frequency in all groups (7-9%). The combination of muscle symptoms with marked CK elevations (greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal) was seen in only five patients: one in a 40 mg/day dose group and four in the 80 mg/day dose group. No patient developed rhabdomyolysis. The incidence of clinical and laboratory adverse events requiring discontinuation was 6% for the placebo group and from 7% (20 mg/day) to 9% (80 mg/day) for lovastatin treatment groups. No new types of adverse experiences related to lovastatin treatment were reported. Lovastatin, as an adjunct to diet for the reduction of elevated LDL cholesterol, was generally very well tolerated.

Alpha-adrenergic blockers: mechanism of action, blood pressure control, and effects of lipoprotein metabolism.

The sympathetic nervous system plays a major role in the pathogenesis of essential hypertension and is mediated by the alpha and beta receptors. The alpha receptor is divided into two types, alpha 1 and alpha 2, based on response to epinephrine and norepinephrine. alpha 1-Adrenergic receptors have a high affinity for drugs such as prazosin, doxazosin, and terazosin, which act to reduce blood pressure by selective blockade of the receptor. These agents provide a rational approach to the treatment of hypertension by correcting elevated total peripheral resistance, the fundamental hemodynamic abnormality in essential hypertension. In contrast, early alpha-adrenergic receptor blockers nonselectively blocked both alpha 1 and alpha 2 receptors and were unsuitable as antihypertensive agents because they induced tachycardia and patients developed a tolerance to them rapidly. alpha 1-Adrenergic blockers also have beneficial effects on plasma lipoproteins, tending to decrease levels of triglycerides and cholesterol and increase levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and the HDL cholesterol/total cholesterol ratio. beta-Adrenergic blockers, such as propranolol and atenolol, have been shown to have an adverse effect on the lipid profile by tending to increase levels of triglycerides and decrease HDL cholesterol. A number of mechanisms contribute to these effects, in particular, adrenergic modulation of lipoprotein lipase and the triglyceride secretion rate. Doxazosin has been shown to increase the activity of LDL receptors, which may be partly responsible for its beneficial effect on plasma lipids and lipoproteins.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Lowering cholesterol naturally.

Patients today are more likely than ever to seek advice about reducing cholesterol levels. Physicians can help by teaching patients how to cut down on saturated fats. However, as Dr. Nash points out, eating habits are difficult to change, especially for those who think that healthy foods have an unpleasant taste. This article discusses several dietary interventions that have been proven to reduce cholesterol levels and thus the risk of coronary artery disease.

Risk factor knowledge, status, and change in a community screening project.

This report describes a community-based cardiovascular risk-reduction program which targeted high-risk individuals. A total of 1,471 individuals participated and were screened for blood pressure, fasting serum cholesterol, blood glucose level, and appearance of the serum. These individuals also completed a questionnaire regarding their knowledge of heart disease. Overall, 522 (35.5%) individuals had a cholesterol level of 240+ mg/dl; 261 (17.7%) had hypertension; 118 (8%) had a glucose level of 120+ mg/100 ml blood; 266 (18.1%) smoked; and the serum was evaluated as "turbid" or "lipemic" in 105 (7.1%). Therefore, of the 1,471 individuals examined, 733 (49.8%) could be considered "at risk" due to the presence of one or more risk factors. Interestingly, 73% of respondents knew their blood pressure, whereas only 15% and 12%, respectively, knew their cholesterol and glucose levels. Eighty percent of the sample knew that smoking, hypertension, and cholesterol were risk factors, but only 50% of the sample identified diabetes as an independent risk factor. Contrary to expectation, knowledge of heart disease and diabetes was not related to either initial level or change in cholesterol at 18-month retest. Overall, these results indicate that a community screening program can identify high risk individuals at a relatively low cost, and that knowledge of risk factors and disease is not related to initial risk status or self-initiated change in risk status.