-
1.
Dose-Dependent Inhibitory Effect of Rosuvastatin in Japanese Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction on Serum Concentration of Matrix Metalloproteinases-INVITATION Trial.
Shirakawa, T, Fujisue, K, Nakamura, S, Yamamoto, N, Oshima, S, Matsumura, T, Tsunoda, R, Hirai, N, Koide, S, Tayama, S, et al
Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis. 2022;(2):229-241
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIM: Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) play critical roles in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This trial was conducted to determine the potential effects of higher-dose rosuvastatin on circulating MMP levels in patients with AMI. METHODS This was a multicenter, open-label, 1:1 randomized, parallel-group study. Patients with AMI were randomly assigned to the appropriate-dose group (10 mg rosuvastatin once daily) or the low-dose group (2.5 mg rosuvastatin once daily) within 24 hours after percutaneous coronary intervention. MMP-2 and MMP-9 levels were measured on day 1 and at week 4, 12, and 24 after enrollment. The primary endpoint was the change in MMP levels at 24 weeks after enrollment. The secondary endpoints were change in MMP levels at day 1 and weeks 4 and 12 after enrollment. RESULTS Between August 2017 and October 2018, 120 patients with AMI from 19 institutions were randomly assigned to either the appropriate-dose or the low-dose group. There were 109 patients who completed the 24-week follow-up. The primary endpoint for both MMP-2 and MMP-9 was not significantly different between the two groups. The change in the active/total ratio of MMP-9 at week 12 after baseline was significantly lower in the appropriate-dose group compared with the low-dose group (0.81 [-52.8-60.1]% vs. 70.1 [-14.5-214.2]%, P=0.004), while the changes in MMP-2 were not significantly different between the two groups during the study period. CONCLUSIONS This study could not demonstrate the superiority of appropriate-dose of rosuvastatin in inhibiting serum MMPs levels in patients with AMI.
-
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.
Rosuvastatin use increases plasma fibrinolytic potential: a randomised clinical trial.
Schol-Gelok, S, de Maat, MPM, Biedermann, JS, van Gelder, T, Leebeek, FWG, Lijfering, WM, van der Meer, FJM, Rijken, DC, Versmissen, J, Kruip, MJHA
British journal of haematology. 2020;(6):916-922
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
We conducted a study to assess the effect of rosuvastatin use on fibrinolysis in patients with previous venous thromboembolism (VTE). This was a post hoc analysis within the STAtins Reduce Thrombophilia (START) study (NCT01613794). Plasma fibrinolytic potential, fibrinogen, plasmin inhibitor, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) and thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor (TAFI) were measured before and after four weeks of rosuvastatin or no treatment in participants with prior confirmed VTE, after ending anticoagulant therapy. In the non-rosuvastatin group (n = 121), plasma fibrinolytic potential and individual fibrinolysis parameters did not change at the end of the study versus the baseline, whereas in the rosuvastatin group (n = 126), plasma fibrinolytic potential increased: the mean clot lysis time decreased by 8·75 min (95% CI -13·8 to -3·72), and plasmin inhibitor levels and TAFI activity were lower at the end of the study (-0·05 U/ml; 95% CI -0·07 to -0·02 and -4·77%; 95% CI -6·81 to -2·73, respectively). PAI-1 levels did not change and fibrinogen levels were 0·17 g/l (95% CI 0·04-0·29) higher. In participants with prior VTE, rosuvastatin use led to an increased fibrinolytic potential compared with non-statin use. Our findings support the need for further studies on the possible role for statins in the secondary prevention of VTE.
-
4.
Effects of Fatty Acid Therapy in Addition to Strong Statin on Coronary Plaques in Acute Coronary Syndrome: An Optical Coherence Tomography Study.
Kita, Y, Watanabe, M, Kamon, D, Ueda, T, Soeda, T, Okayama, S, Ishigami, K, Kawata, H, Horii, M, Inoue, F, et al
Journal of the American Heart Association. 2020;(16):e015593
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vascular healing response associated with adjunctive n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid therapy therapy in patients receiving strong statin therapy remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of polyunsaturated fatty acid therapy with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) or docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in addition to strong statin therapy on coronary atherosclerotic plaques using optical coherence tomography. METHODS AND RESULTS This prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial included 130 patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with strong statins. They were assigned to either statin only (control group, n=42), statin+high-dose EPA (1800 mg/day) (EPA group, n=40), statin+EPA (930 mg/day)+DHA (750 mg/day) (EPA+DHA group, n=48). Optical coherence tomography was performed at baseline and at the 8-month follow-up. The target for optical coherence tomography analysis was a nonculprit lesion with a lipid plaque. Between baseline and the 8-month follow-up, fibrous cap thickness (FCT) significantly increased in all 3 groups. There were no significant differences in the percent change for minimum FCT between the EPA or EPA+DHA group and the control group. In patients with FCT <120 µm (median value), the percent change for minimum FCT was significantly higher in the EPA or EPA+DHA group compared with the control group. CONCLUSIONS EPA or EPA+DHA therapy in addition to strong statin therapy did not significantly increase FCT in nonculprit plaques compared with strong statin therapy alone, but significantly increased FCT in patients with thinner FCT. Registration URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/; Unique identifier: UMIN 000012825.
-
5.
A randomised controlled trial of rosuvastatin for the prevention of aminoglycoside-induced kidney toxicity in children with cystic fibrosis.
McWilliam, SJ, Rosala-Hallas, A, Jones, AP, Shaw, V, Greenhalf, W, Jaki, T, Smyth, AR, Smyth, RL, Pirmohamed, M
Scientific reports. 2020;(1):1796
Abstract
The PROteKT study tested the hypothesis that rosuvastatin can inhibit aminoglycoside-induced nephrotoxicity in children with Cystic Fibrosis (CF). This open label, parallel group, randomised controlled trial recruited children and young people aged 6 to 18 years with CF at 13 paediatric CF treatment centres in the UK. Participants were randomised equally to either receive oral rosuvastatin (10 mg once daily) or no intervention (control) throughout clinically indicated treatment with intravenous tobramycin. The primary outcome was the difference between the groups in mean fold-change in urinary Kidney Injury Molecule-1 (KIM-1). Fifty (rosuvastatin n = 23, control n = 27) participants were recruited between May 2015 and January 2017. Primary outcome data was available for 88% (rosuvastatin n = 20, control n = 24). The estimated mean treatment difference in the geometric mean-fold change of normalised KIM-1 was 1.08 (95% CI 0.87-1.35, p = 0.48). In total there were 12 adverse reactions, all mild, reported by five participants randomised to rosuvastatin, and one serious adverse event in each group. Whilst no protective effect of rosuvastatin was seen, there was a lower than expected level of nephrotoxicity in the cohort. Therefore, we can neither confirm nor refute the hypothesis that rosuvastatin protects against aminoglycoside nephrotoxicity.
-
6.
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.
-
7.
Comparative efficacy between atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in the prevention of cardiovascular disease recurrence.
Perez-Calahorra, S, Laclaustra, M, Marco-Benedi, V, Pinto, X, Sanchez-Hernandez, RM, Plana, N, Ortega, E, Fuentes, F, Civeira, F
Lipids in health and disease. 2019;(1):216
Abstract
BACKGROUND There is no randomized clinical trials with recurrence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) as a major outcome with rosuvastatin. In order to analyze potential differences in the clinical response to atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in secondary ASCVD prevention, we have analyzed the clinical evolution of those subjects of the Dyslipemia Registry of the Spanish Society of Arteriosclerosis (SEA) who at the time of inclusion in the Registry had already suffered an ASCVD. METHODS This observational, retrospective, multicenter, national study was designed to determine potential differences between the use of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in the ASCVD recurrence. Three different follow-up start-times were performed: time of inclusion in the registry; time of first event if this occurred after 2005, and time of first event without date restriction. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups. Among atorvastatin or rosuvastatin users, 89 recurrences of ASCVD were recorded (21.9%), of which 85.4% were coronary. At the inclusion of the subject in the registry, 345 participants had not suffered a recurrence yet. These 345 subjects accumulated 1050 person-years in a mean follow-up of 3 years. Event rates were 2.73 (95% CI: 1.63, 4.25) cases/100 person-years and 2.34 (95% CI: 1.17, 4.10) cases/100 person-years in the atorvastatin and rosuvastatin groups, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups independently of the follow-up start-time. CONCLUSIONS This study does not find differences between high doses of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin in the recurrence of ASCVD, and supports their use as clinically equivalent in secondary prevention of ASCVD.
-
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.
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.
-
10.
Comparison of Methods to Generalize Randomized Clinical Trial Results Without Individual-Level Data for the Target Population.
Hong, JL, Webster-Clark, M, Jonsson Funk, M, Stürmer, T, Dempster, SE, Cole, SR, Herr, I, LoCasale, R
American journal of epidemiology. 2019;(2):426-437
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Our study explored the application of methods to generalize randomized controlled trial results to a target population without individual-level data. We compared 4 methods using aggregate data for the target population to generalize results from the international trial, Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER), to a target population of trial-eligible patients in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). The gold-standard method used individual data from both the trial and CPRD to predict probabilities of being sampled in the trial and to reweight trial participants to reflect CPRD patient characteristics. Methods 1 and 2 used weighting methods based on simulated individual data or the method of moments, respectively. Method 3 weighted the trial's subgroup-specific treatment effects to match the distribution of an effect modifier in CPRD. Method 4 calculated the expected absolute benefits in CPRD assuming homogeneous relative treatment effect. Methods based on aggregate data for the target population generally yielded results between the trial and gold-standard estimates. Methods 1 and 2 yielded estimates closest to the gold-standard estimates when continuous effect modifiers were represented as categorical variables. Although individual data or data on joint distributions remains the best approach to generalize trial results, these methods using aggregate data might be useful tools for timely assessment of randomized trial generalizability.