-
1.
Effect of Upadacitinib on the Pharmacokinetics of Rosuvastatin or Atorvastatin in Healthy Subjects.
Mohamed, MF, Coppola, S, Feng, T, Camp, HS, Kim, E, Othman, AA
Clinical pharmacology in drug development. 2021;(11):1335-1344
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
This phase 1, 2-part, 2-period, open-label, drug-drug interaction study evaluated the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between upadacitinib and rosuvastatin, an organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP) 1B1 and breast cancer resistance protein substrate, or atorvastatin, a cytochrome P450 3A, OATP1B1, and OATP1B3 substrate, in 36 healthy volunteers. During period 1, a single dose of rosuvastatin (5 mg; part 1) or atorvastatin (10 mg; part 2) was administered on day 1, followed by a washout period of 5 days. During period 2, once-daily doses of upadacitinib extended-release (30 mg) were administered on days 1 to 10, and a single dose of rosuvastatin (5 mg; part 1) or atorvastatin (10 mg; part 2) was administered 1 hour after the upadacitinib dose on day 7. Serial blood samples were collected for assays of drug concentrations. In Part 1, rosuvastatin maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax ) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUCinf ) were 23% and 33% lower, respectively, when administered with upadacitinib relative to when administered alone. In part 2, atorvastatin Cmax and AUCinf was 11% and 23% lower, respectively, when administered with upadacitinib relative to when administered alone. The Cmax and AUCinf of the active metabolite ortho-hydroxyatorvastatin remained unchanged. Administration of a single 5-mg dose of rosuvastatin or a single 10-mg dose of atorvastatin had no relevant effect on upadacitinib Cmax or area under the plasma concentration-time curve. These results demonstrated that upadacitinib has no clinically relevant effect on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin or on substrates transported by OATP1B or breast cancer resistance protein.
-
2.
Evaluation of the Effects of Repeat-Dose Dabrafenib on the Single-Dose Pharmacokinetics of Rosuvastatin (OATP1B1/1B3 Substrate) and Midazolam (CYP3A4 Substrate).
Nebot, N, Won, CS, Moreno, V, Muñoz-Couselo, E, Lee, DY, Gasal, E, Bouillaud, E
Clinical pharmacology in drug development. 2021;(9):1054-1063
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Dabrafenib is an oral BRAF kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of various BRAF V600 mutation-positive solid tumors. In vitro observations suggesting cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A induction and organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP) inhibition prompted us to evaluate the effect of dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam 3 mg (CYP3A substrate) and rosuvastatin 10 mg (OATP1B1/1B3 substrate) in a clinical phase 1, open-label, fixed-sequence study in patients with BRAF V600 mutation-positive tumors. Repeat dabrafenib dosing resulted in a 2.56-fold increase in rosuvastatin maximum observed concentration (Cmax ), an earlier time to Cmax , but only a 7% increase in area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 (predose) extrapolated to infinite time. Midazolam Cmax and AUC extrapolated to infinite time decreased by 47% and 65%, respectively, with little effect on time to Cmax . No new safety findings were reported. Exposure of drugs that are CYP3A4 substrates is likely to decrease when coadministered with dabrafenib. Concentrations of medicinal products that are sensitive OATP1B1/1B3 substrates may increase during the absorption phase.
-
3.
Comparison between Atorvastatin and Rosuvastatin on Secondary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Rate and the Risk Factors in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease.
Zhang, J, Wang, J, Yu, H, Wang, G, Zhang, J, Zhu, R, Liu, X, Li, J
Current drug metabolism. 2020;(10):818-828
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim is to compare atorvastatin versus rosuvastatin on secondary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) rate and explore risk factors in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. METHODS A cohort study with 283 CHD subjects was launched from 2011 to 2015. Cox proportional hazards regression model, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) and nomogram were used to compare the effect of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin on secondary PCI rate and disease risk factors. Even why the two statins had different effects based on gene expression profile analysis has been explored. RESULTS Gene FFA (Freely fatty acid), AST (Aspartate Transaminase) and ALT (Alanine transaminase) showed the statistical difference between the four statin groups (P<0.05). In the AA group (Continuous Atorvastatin usage), albumin was a risk factor (Hazard Ratio (HR):1.076, 95%CI (1.001, 1.162), p<0.05). In the AR group (Start with Atorvastatin usage, then change to Rosuvastatin usage), ApoA was a protective factor (HR:0.004, 95%CI (0.001, 0.665), p<0.05). GLB (Galactosidase Beta) was a risk factor (HR:1.262, 95%CI (1.010, 1.576), p<0.05). In RR group (Continuous Rosuvastatin usage), ApoE was a protective factor (HR:0.943, 95%CI (0.890, 1.000), <0.05). ALT was a risk factor (HR:1.030, 95%CI (1.000, 1.060), p<0.05). CONCLUSION Patients in the RA group had the lowest secondary PCI rate. ALT was a risk factor in the RR group. Gene Gpt (Glutamic Pyruvic Transaminase) encoded for one subtype of ALT had a significantly different expression in different statin groups.
-
4.
A randomized, double-blind clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination of amlodipine/rosuvastatin in patients with dyslipidemia and hypertension.
Kim, W, Chang, K, Cho, EJ, Ahn, JC, Yu, CW, Cho, KI, Kim, YJ, Kang, DH, Kim, SY, Lee, SH, et al
Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.). 2020;(2):261-269
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group phase III clinical trial aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of a rosuvastatin + amlodipine combination compared with that of rosuvastatin or amlodipine monotherapy in hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia. A total of 106 patients of 15 institutions in Korea were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: rosuvastatin 20 mg + amlodipine 10 mg, amlodipine 10 mg, or rosuvastatin 20 mg. After 8 weeks of treatment, the mean ± SD of change in mean sitting systolic blood pressure (msSBP) was -22.82 ± 12.99 mm Hg in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group, the most decreased among the treatment groups. The percentage of patients whose msSBP decreased ≥20 mm Hg or msDBP decreased ≥10 mm Hg was also highest in this group (74.29%). The mean ± SD percentage change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline after 8 weeks was -52.53% ± 11.21% in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group, the most decreased among the treatment groups. More patients in the rosuvastatin + amlodipine group achieved their target LDL-C goal at 8 weeks, compared with the other treatment groups (97.14%). No serious adverse events or adverse drug reactions were observed in all groups. In hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia, combination treatment with rosuvastatin 20 mg + amlodipine 10 mg effectively reduced blood pressure and LDL-C levels while maintaining safety.
-
5.
Effects of Rosuvastatin and Aspirin on Retinal Vascular Structures in Hypercholesterolemic Patients with Low-to-Moderate Risk of Coronary Artery Disease.
Li, L, Wang, S, Huang, H, Cai, Y, Xi, Y, Bai, Y, Ma, C
American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions. 2019;(4):415-420
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Atherosclerosis erodes large elastic arteries and damages peripheral small vessels. Evaluating retinal vessel caliber enables exploration of the effect of improving microcirculation with statins. OBJECTIVE We investigated whether rosuvastatin therapy improves retinal vasculature in hypercholesterolemic patients with a low-to-moderate risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS This was a prospective, open-label, randomized study in which 127 patients were enrolled and randomized (ratio 1:1) into rosuvastatin and control groups. RESULTS Rosuvastatin increased retinal arteriolar calibers by 3.560 µm at 12 months, decreased retinal venular calibers by 3.110 µm at 6 months and by 5.860 µm at 12 months, and increased the artery-vein ratio (AVR) by 2.68% at 6 months and by 5.90% at 12 months. Meanwhile, in the control group, retinal arteriolar calibers decreased by 1.110 µm at 12 months, retinal venular calibers increased by 1.020 µm at 6 months and by 1.04 µm at 12 months, and AVR decreased by 1.12% at 6 months and by 1.73% at 12 months. All the above parameters were statistically significant between groups, but there was no significant change in retinal arteriolar calibers at 6 months. The increased AVR correlated significantly with decreased C-reactive protein (CRP) at 6 months and decreased low-density lipoprotein and CRP at 12 months. DISCUSSION For patients with a low-to-moderate risk of CAD, we found a significant effect of rosuvastatin on retinal microvasculature, including AVR increase, venular constriction, and arteriolar dilation after 6-12 months of treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION Chinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier number ChiCTR-IOR-15006664.
-
6.
Evaluation of Clinically Relevant Drug-Drug Interactions and Population Pharmacokinetics of Darolutamide in Patients with Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: Results of Pre-Specified and Post Hoc Analyses of the Phase III ARAMIS Trial.
Shore, N, Zurth, C, Fricke, R, Gieschen, H, Graudenz, K, Koskinen, M, Ploeger, B, Moss, J, Prien, O, Borghesi, G, et al
Targeted oncology. 2019;(5):527-539
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Darolutamide, an androgen receptor antagonist with a distinct molecular structure, significantly prolonged metastasis-free survival versus placebo in the phase III ARAMIS study in men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). In this population, polypharmacy for age-related comorbidities is common and may increase drug-drug interaction (DDI) risks. Preclinical/phase I study data suggest darolutamide has a low DDI potential-other than breast cancer resistance protein/organic anion transporter protein substrates (e.g., statins), no clinically relevant effect on comedications is expected. OBJECTIVE Our objective was to evaluate the effect of commonly administered drugs on the pharmacokinetics of darolutamide and the effect of comedications potentially affected by darolutamide on safety in patients with nmCRPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Comorbidities and comedication use in the 1509 ARAMIS participants treated with darolutamide 600 mg twice daily or placebo were assessed. A population pharmacokinetic analysis evaluated whether comedications affected the pharmacokinetics of darolutamide in a subset of 388 patients. A subgroup analysis of adverse events (AEs) in statin users versus nonusers was conducted. RESULTS Most participants (median age 74 years) had at least one comorbidity (98.4% in both arms) and used at least one comedication (98.7% with darolutamide vs. 98.0% with placebo); these were similar across study arms. Despite frequent use of comedications with DDI potential, no significant effects on darolutamide pharmacokinetics were identified. Comedications included lipid-modifying agents (34.5%), β-blockers (29.7%), antithrombotics (42.8%), and systemic antibiotics (26.9%). AE incidence was similar across study arms in statin users and nonusers. Study limitations include the small sample size for sub-analyses. CONCLUSIONS These analyses suggest the pharmacokinetic profile of darolutamide is not affected by a number of commonly administered drugs in patients with nmCRPC. Although pharmacokinetic data have indicated that darolutamide has the potential to interact with rosuvastatin, used to assess DDI in these studies, this finding did not seem to translate into increased AEs due to statin use in the ARAMIS trial. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02200614.
-
7.
Positron Emission Tomography Imaging of [11 C]Rosuvastatin Hepatic Concentrations and Hepatobiliary Transport in Humans in the Absence and Presence of Cyclosporin A.
Billington, S, Shoner, S, Lee, S, Clark-Snustad, K, Pennington, M, Lewis, D, Muzi, M, Rene, S, Lee, J, Nguyen, TB, et al
Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics. 2019;(5):1056-1066
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Using positron emission tomography imaging, we determined the hepatic concentrations and hepatobiliary transport of [11 C]rosuvastatin (RSV; i.v. injection) in the absence (n = 6) and presence (n = 4 of 6) of cyclosporin A (CsA; i.v. infusion) following a therapeutic dose of unlabeled RSV (5 mg, p.o.) in healthy human volunteers. The sinusoidal uptake, sinusoidal efflux, and biliary efflux clearance (CL; mL/minute) of [11 C]RSV, estimated through compartment modeling were 1,205.6 ± 384.8, 16.2 ± 11.2, and 5.1 ± 1.8, respectively (n = 6). CsA (blood concentration: 2.77 ± 0.24 μM), an organic-anion-transporting polypeptide, Na+ -taurocholate cotransporting polypeptide, and breast cancer resistance protein inhibitor increased [11 C]RSV systemic blood exposure (45%; P < 0.05), reduced its biliary efflux CL (52%; P < 0.05) and hepatic uptake (25%; P > 0.05) but did not affect its distribution into the kidneys. CsA increased plasma concentrations of coproporphyrin I and III and total bilirubin by 297 ± 69%, 384 ± 102%, and 81 ± 39%, respectively (P < 0.05). These data can be used in the future to verify predictions of hepatic concentrations and hepatobiliary transport of RSV.
-
8.
Efficacy and Safety of a Fixed-Dose Combination of Candesartan and Rosuvastatin on Blood Pressure and Cholesterol in Patients With Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Parallel Phase III Clinical Study.
Cho, KI, Kim, BH, Park, YH, Ahn, JC, Kim, SH, Chung, WJ, Kim, W, Sohn, IS, Shin, JH, Kim, YJ, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2019;(8):1508-1521
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate the blood pressure-lowering and cholesterol-lowering effects of a fixed-dose combination therapy using candesartan (CND)/rosuvastatin (RSV) compared with CND or RSV monotherapy in patients with hypertension and hypercholesterolemia. METHODS This study was a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study. A total of 394 patients were screened. After a 4-week run-in period, 219 of these patients with hypertension and primary hypercholesterolemia were randomized. Patients received 1 of 3 regimens for 8 weeks: (1) CND 32 mg/RSV 20 mg, (2) RSV 20 mg, or (3) CND 32 mg. The primary outcome variables were changes in the systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and the percentage changes in LDL-C from baseline to the drug treatment at 8 weeks. The secondary outcome variables were percentage changes of total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-C, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B, apolipoprotein A-I, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and glucose metabolic indices, including percentage changes of the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), adiponectin, and hemoglobin A1c. Tolerability of combination therapy was compared with other monotherapy groups. FINDINGS The percentage changes of LDL-C were -48.6% (from 157.2 to 80.1 mg/dL) in the RSV group and -49.8% (from 160.2 to 78.9 mg/dL) in the CND/RSV group from baseline to the end of 8 weeks of treatment. Mean SBP and DBP were significantly decreased in the CND/RSV and CND groups after 8 weeks (P < 0.001 for all); however, no significant differences were found between the 2 groups. Total cholesterol levels, triglycerides, non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B were significantly reduced in the CND/RSV and RSV groups, with no significant differences between the groups compared with the CND group (P < 0.001 for all). The percentage changes of HOMA-IR, adiponectin, and hemoglobin A1c had no significant differences between the combination groups and monotherapy groups. However, in a 2-sample t test, HOMA-IR was significantly decreased in the CND/RSV group compared with the RSV group in nondiabetic patients (mean [SD] percentage change of HOMA-IR, -8.7% [37.6%] vs 17.1% [53.1%]; P = 0.048). There were no significant differences in metabolic indices between the diabetic groups. Adverse events in the CND/RSV group were similar to those in the monotherapy group. IMPLICATIONS Once-daily fixed-dose combination therapy with CND/RSV is an effective, tolerable, convenient treatment option for patients with essential hypertension and hypercholesteremia. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02770261.
-
9.
Efficacy and Safety of Ezetimibe and Rosuvastatin Combination Therapy Versus Those of Rosuvastatin Monotherapy in Patients With Primary Hypercholesterolemia.
Kim, W, Yoon, YE, Shin, SH, Bae, JW, Hong, BK, Hong, SJ, Sung, KC, Han, SH, Kim, W, Rhee, MY, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2018;(6):993-1013
Abstract
PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combination treatment of rosuvastatin with ezetimibe in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. METHODS This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study comprised a main study and an extension study. In the main study, the efficacy and safety of a combination of rosuvastatin (5, 10, and 20 mg) with ezetimibe (10 mg) were compared with those of rosuvastatin (5, 10, and 20 mg) alone. The subjects who achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III LDL-C goal in the main study and agreed to a further study were enrolled for the extension study. In the extension study, ezetimibe 10 mg was also administered to subjects who had received rosuvastatin (5, 10, and 20 mg) alone in the main study, and the same treatment was continued for subjects who had received a combination of rosuvastatin with ezetimibe in the main study. FINDINGS At the end of the main study (week 8), LDL-C levels were significantly lower in subjects receiving combination therapy than in those receiving rosuvastatin monotherapy. Other lipid profiles also significantly improved in the combination therapy group. These improvements continued in the extension study. The combination therapy of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe was generally well tolerated. At the end of the main study, more subjects achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III LDL-C goal in the combination therapy group than in the monotherapy group. The increased dosage of rosuvastatin was also well tolerated in the combination treatment. IMPLICATIONS Combination therapy of ezetimibe 10 mg with varying doses of rosuvastatin that are commonly used in the clinical field improved the lipid profile and allowed more subjects to reach the LDL-C goal in primary hypercholesterolemia compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy. In addition, the efficacy of the combination therapy was maintained for the extended period. Additional beneficial changes were also achieved with combination therapy even in patients who responded well to rosuvastatin monotherapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03288038.
-
10.
A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Active Comparator Clinical Trial to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy With Ezetimibe and Rosuvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin Monotherapy in Patients With Hypercholesterolemia: I-ROSETTE (Ildong Rosuvastatin & Ezetimibe for Hypercholesterolemia) Randomized Controlled Trial.
Hong, SJ, Jeong, HS, Ahn, JC, Cha, DH, Won, KH, Kim, W, Cho, SK, Kim, SY, Yoo, BS, Sung, KC, et al
Clinical therapeutics. 2018;(2):226-241.e4
Abstract
PURPOSE Combination therapy with ezetimibe and statins is recommended in cases of statin intolerance or insufficiency. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of combination therapy with ezetimibe and rosuvastatin versus those of rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia. METHODS I-ROSETTE (Ildong ROSuvastatin & ezETimibe for hypercholesTElolemia) was an 8-week, double-blind, multicenter, Phase III randomized controlled trial conducted at 20 hospitals in the Republic of Korea. Patients with hypercholesterolemia who required medical treatment according to National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines were eligible for participation in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ezetimibe 10 mg/rosuvastatin 20 mg, ezetimibe 10 mg/rosuvastatin 10 mg, ezetimibe 10 mg/rosuvastatin 5 mg, rosuvastatin 20 mg, rosuvastatin 10 mg, or rosuvastatin 5 mg in a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio. The primary end point was the difference in the mean percent change from baseline in LDL-C level after 8 weeks of treatment between the ezetimibe/rosuvastatin and rosuvastatin treatment groups. All patients were assessed for adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory data, and vital signs. FINDINGS Of 396 patients, 389 with efficacy data were analyzed. Baseline characteristics among 6 groups were similar. After 8 weeks of double-blind treatment, the percent changes in adjusted mean LDL-C levels at week 8 compared with baseline values were -57.0% (2.1%) and -44.4% (2.1%) in the total ezetimibe/rosuvastatin and total rosuvastatin groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The LDL-C-lowering efficacy of each of the ezetimibe/rosuvastatin combinations was superior to that of each of the respective doses of rosuvastatin. The mean percent change in LDL-C level in all ezetimibe/rosuvastatin combination groups was >50%. The number of patients who achieved target LDL-C levels at week 8 was significantly greater in the ezetimibe/rosuvastatin group (180 [92.3%] of 195 patients) than in the rosuvastatin monotherapy group (155 [79.9%] of 194 patients) (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the incidence of overall AEs, adverse drug reactions, and serious AEs; laboratory findings, including liver function test results and creatinine kinase levels, were comparable between groups. IMPLICATIONS Fixed-dose combinations of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin significantly improved lipid profiles in patients with hypercholesterolemia compared with rosuvastatin monotherapy. All groups treated with rosuvastatin and ezetimibe reported a decrease in mean LDL-C level >50%. The safety and tolerability of ezetimibe/rosuvastatin therapy were comparable with those of rosuvastatin monotherapy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02749994.