-
1.
High-dose statin monotherapy versus low-dose statin/ezetimibe combination on fasting and postprandial lipids and endothelial function in obese patients with the metabolic syndrome: The PANACEA study.
Westerink, J, Deanfield, JE, Imholz, BP, Spiering, W, Basart, DC, Coll, B, Kastelein, JJ, Visseren, FL
Atherosclerosis. 2013;(1):118-24
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low-dose statin therapy in combination with ezetimibe, an inhibitor of intestinal cholesterol absorption, lowers plasma LDL-cholesterol levels to a similar degree as high-dose statin monotherapy. This study assessed whether similar LDL-cholesterol lowering with simvastatin/ezetimibe combination therapy improves fasting and postprandial arterial endothelial function compared to high-dose statin therapy alone. METHODS Multicenter, double-blind, crossover trial in 100 abdominally obese patients with the metabolic syndrome, randomized to 6 weeks' treatment with simvastatin 80 mg or simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg. Flow mediated dilatation (FMD) and peripheral arterial tonometry (EndoPAT) as well as plasma lipids were measured in the fasting state and after an oral lipid load at baseline and after both treatments. RESULTS Fasting LDL-cholesterol levels (3.57 mmol/L at baseline) were reduced to 1.79 mmol/L following treatment with simvastatin 80 mg and 1.81 mmol/L with simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg, respectively. Plasma lipids were similar at 4 h after an oral lipid load following both treatments for 6 weeks. Fasting endothelial function was also similar with both treatments when assessed by FMD (adjusted mean ± SE: 4.35 ± 0.19 vs. 4.43 ± 0.18; P = 0.777) and EndoPAT (2.12 ± 0.05 vs 2.20 ± 0.05; P = 0.304). After an oral fat load, changes in endothelial function were also comparable for both treatments as assessed by FMD (-0.34 ± 0.21 vs. -0.43 ± 0.20; P = 0.766) and EndoPAT (0.00 ± 0.07 vs. -0.04 ± 0.08; P = 0.712). CONCLUSION Treatment with simvastatin/ezetimibe 10/10 mg induced no difference in endothelial function in the fasting and postprandial state compared to simvastatin 80 mg while attaining similar LDL-c levels in obese patients with metabolic syndrome.
-
2.
Age, abdominal obesity, and baseline high-sensitivity C-reactive protein are associated with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B responses to ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin in patients with metabolic syndrome.
Robinson, JG, Ballantyne, CM, Hsueh, WA, Rosen, JB, Lin, J, Shah, AK, Tomassini, JE, Lowe, RS, Tershakovec, AM
Journal of clinical lipidology. 2013;(4):292-303
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment response to lipid-lowering therapy can vary in patients with the metabolic syndrome (MetS) due to various patient demographic and baseline characteristics. OBJECTIVE This study assessed the relationships between baseline characteristics and changes in lipid variables, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and attainment of prespecified low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels in MetS patients treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin. METHODS This is a post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, 6-week parallel study in >1000 hypercholesterolemic subjects (median age of 59 years) with MetS and moderately high/high coronary heart disease risk who were treated with ezetimibe/simvastatin (10/20 and 10/40 mg) or atorvastatin (10, 20, 40 mg). Factors that could affect these treatments were assessed by multivariate analysis. RESULTS Increasing age, abdominal obesity (waist circumference ≥ 40/35 inches for men/women), and lower baseline hs-CRP were significant predictors of greater reductions in LDL-C, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol but not for changes in HDL-C or apolipoprotein AI; effects of race and baseline triglycerides, non-HDL-C, LDL-C, or HDL-C levels were more limited. Age ≥ 65 years (versus <65 years) was also associated with significantly greater attainment of all LDL-C and non-HDL-C targets, whereas abdominal obesity, gender (female > male) and lower baseline LDL-C, non-HDL-C, triglycerides, and hs-CRP were associated with improved attainment for some of these targets. Blood pressure, fasting glucose, Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance tertiles, and diabetes did not predict response for any efficacy variable. Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment (versus atorvastatin) was a significant predictor for change in most efficacy variables. CONCLUSIONS Treatment responses to ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin in at-risk patients with the MetS were related to age (≥ 65 years), abdominal obesity, and lower baseline hs-CRP. Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment was found to be consistently more effective than atorvastatin at the specified dose comparisons across these subgroups. The clinical value of predictive factors requires further study in outcome trials.
-
3.
The efficacy and safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin combination compared with intensified lipid-lowering treatment strategies in diabetic subjects with and without metabolic syndrome.
Jimenez, JG, Rosen, JB, Pirags, V, Massaad, R, Hanson, ME, Brudi, P, Triscari, J
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2013;(6):513-22
Abstract
AIMS: The objective was to assess the consistency of effect of switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg versus doubling the baseline statin dose (to simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg) or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg across subgroups of subjects with (n = 617) and without (n = 191) metabolic syndrome (MetS). METHODS This was a post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, 6-week study of adults 18-79 years with cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥70 and ≤160 mg/dl. The percent change in LDL-C and other lipids was estimated within each subgroup separately. Safety and tolerability were assessed. RESULTS In subjects with MetS, percent changes in LDL-C and other lipids were greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin versus doubling baseline statin or numerically greater versus switching to rosuvastatin, except high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein (Apo) AI (mean percent changes in LDL-C were: -22.49% ezetimibe/simvastatin, -9.64% doubled baseline statin and -19.20% rosuvastatin). In subjects without MetS, percent changes in LDL-C, total cholesterol and Apo B were greater with ezetimibe/simvastatin versus doubling baseline statin or numerically greater versus switching to rosuvastatin (mean percent changes in LDL-C were: -25.14% ezetimibe/simvastatin, -4.75% doubled baseline statin and -19.75% rosuvastatin). Safety profiles were generally similar. CONCLUSION These results showed that switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg was more effective at reducing LDL-C, total cholesterol and Apo B versus doubling the baseline statin dose to simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg regardless of MetS status. These results were generally similar to those of the full cohort.
-
4.
Effects of ezetimibe on visceral fat in the metabolic syndrome: a randomised controlled study.
Takase, H, Dohi, Y, Okado, T, Hashimoto, T, Goto, Y, Kimura, G
European journal of clinical investigation. 2012;(12):1287-94
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although visceral obesity, a key abnormality in the metabolic syndrome, is an important risk for cardiovascular diseases, reduction in visceral fat is hard to achieve despite intensive efforts directed at lifestyle modification. The present study was designed to investigate whether ezetimibe, an inhibitor of intestinal cholesterol absorption through its binding to Niemann-Pick C1-like 1, reduces visceral fat in patients with metabolic syndrome. MATERIALS AND METHODS Seventy-eight outpatients (63·7 ± 10·4 years old) with metabolic syndrome were enroled and randomly assigned to receive either ezetimibe (10 mg/day) or nothing for 6 months. Changes in visceral fat were assessed by computed tomography. RESULTS Treatment with ezetimibe significantly improved lipid profiles. Visceral fat was decreased 7·2%, from 161·3 ± 58·6 cm(2) to 148·4 ± 52·7 cm(2) (P < 0·05), and adiponectin was increased 7·7%, from 3·61 ± 3·10 μg/mL to 3·86 ± 3·62 μg/mL (P < 0·05), after ezetimibe therapy; these beneficial effects were not observed in the control group. The increase in the adiponectin level was correlated with the reduction in visceral fat after ezetimibe treatment. Furthermore, ezetimibe reduced fasting insulin levels (P < 0·05) and improved the homoeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) (P < 0·05). CONCLUSIONS Ezetimibe reduces visceral fat with beneficial effects on adiponectin and insulin resistance in patients with metabolic syndrome, suggesting a new therapeutic approach in such patients.
-
5.
Combination therapy for dyslipidemia.
Sharma, M
Current opinion in cardiology. 2011;(5):420-3
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Residual cardiovascular risk remains in individuals treated with statins and combination therapies may reduce this risk further. RECENT FINDINGS Most previous trials of combination therapies have shown a favorable effect on lipid profiles without clinical superiority over statin monotherapy. Trial design has been hampered by short duration and comparison with a low dose statin. The Study of Heart and Renal Protection trial has recently reported findings and shows a benefit of ezetimibe/simvastatin over simvastatin alone. AIM-HIGH (Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic syndrome with Low HDL/High Triglycerides and Impact on Global Health Outcomes), a trial of statin/niacin, has been prematurely halted for futility. Finally, combining a statin with both niacin and ezetimibe shows significant enhancement of the therapeutic effect on lipid profiles. SUMMARY Current evidence continues to support initiation of a potent statin with titration to achieve targets. Combinations may be useful in individuals unable to reach desired lipid levels on maximal tolerated doses of statins.
-
6.
Effects of coadministered ezetimibe plus fenofibrate in mixed dyslipidemic patients with metabolic syndrome.
Bays, HE, Shah, A, Macdonell, G, Taggart, WV, Gumbiner, B
Metabolic syndrome and related disorders. 2011;(2):135-42
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Patients with metabolic syndrome are at increased risk of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease, often have mixed dyslipidemia, and may thus require more aggressive treatment of multiple lipid parameters. The objective of this investigation was to compare the treatment response of ezetimibe co-administered with fenofibrate in mixed dyslipidemic patients with and without metabolic syndrome. METHODS This post hoc analysis evaluated 625 patients 18-75 years of age with mixed dyslipidemia, defined as elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (130-220 mg/dL) and elevated triglycerides (TG) levels (200-500 mg/dL). Patients were randomized in a 1:3:3:3 ratio to 1 of 4 treatments for 12 weeks: Placebo; ezetimibe 10 mg; fenofibrate 160 mg; or ezetimibe 10 mg plus fenofibrate 160 mg. Metabolic syndrome was defined by the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria and was identified at baseline in 450 patients. RESULTS Ezetimibe alone, fenofibrate alone, or their combination produced expected, and generally similar, lipid effects among those with or without metabolic syndrome with respect to LDL-C, apolipoprotein B (ApoB), and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels. Ezetimibe alone may have resulted in greater LDL-C and ApoB lowering in the metabolic syndrome group than the non-metabolic syndrome group (P ≤ 0.05 for both). TG and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein had greater reductions in the fenofibrate and fenofibrate plus ezetimibe groups than the ezetimibe alone group (P ≤ 0.05 for both) CONCLUSIONS In this analysis of patients with mixed dyslipidemia, the lipid effects of ezetimibe plus fenofibrate were generally similar in metabolic syndrome patients versus those without metabolic syndrome.
-
7.
Long-term efficacy and safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin coadministered with extended-release niacin in hyperlipidaemic patients with diabetes or metabolic syndrome.
Fazio, S, Guyton, JR, Lin, J, Tomassini, JE, Shah, A, Tershakovec, AM
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2010;(11):983-93
Abstract
AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe/simvastatin (E/S) plus extended-release niacin (N) in hyperlipidaemic patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), metabolic syndrome (MetS) without DM (MetS/non-DM) or neither (non-DM/non-MetS). METHODS A subgroup analysis of a double-blind, 64-week trial of 1220 randomized patients who received E/S (10/20 mg) + N (to 2 g) or E/S (10/20 mg) for 64 weeks, or N (to 2 g) for 24 weeks then E/S (10/20 mg) + N (2 g) or E/S (10/20 mg) for 40 additional weeks. The evaluable populations of this analysis included n = 765 patients at 24 weeks and n = 574 at 64 weeks. Among those receiving N, only those who attained the 2-g dose were included in the analysis. RESULTS E/S+N improved levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, other lipids and lipoprotein ratios compared with N and E/S at 24 weeks and E/S at 64 weeks. The combination increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein AI comparably to N and more than E/S. E/S+N reduced high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels more effectively than N and similarly to E/S. E/S+N was generally well tolerated. Discontinuations due to flushing with N and E/S+N were comparable and greater than E/S in all subgroups. Fasting glucose trended higher for N vs. E/S. Glucose elevations from baseline to 12 weeks were highest for patients with DM (24.9 mg/dl for N, 21.2 mg/dl for E/S+N, 17.5 mg/dl for E/S); fasting glucose then declined to pretreatment levels at 64 weeks in all subgroups. New-onset DM was more frequent among MetS patients than those without MetS during the first 24 weeks and trended higher among those assigned to N-containing regimens [n = 5(5.1%) for N, n = 2(1.7%) for E/S, n = 21(8.8%) for E/S+N]; during the 24-64 week extension study, diabetes was diagnosed in five additional patients in the E/S(cumulative incidence of 5.9%) and one in the E/S+N (cumulative incidence of 9.2%). Treatment-incident elevations in uric acid levels were increased among subjects assigned to N-containing regimens, but there were no effects on symptomatic gout. CONCLUSION Combination E/S+N is a safe treatment option for hyperlipidaemic patients including those with DM and MetS, but requires monitoring of glucose and potentially uric acid levels.
-
8.
Ezetimibe added to atorvastatin compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose in patients at high risk for coronary heart disease with diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome or neither.
Conard, S, Bays, H, Leiter, LA, Bird, S, Lin, J, Hanson, ME, Shah, A, Tershakovec, AM
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2010;(3):210-8
Abstract
AIM: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and metabolic syndrome (MetS) are both associated with increased risk for atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD). Thus, it is useful to know the relative efficacy of lipid-altering drugs in these patient populations. METHODS A double-blind, parallel group trial of adult patients with hypercholesterolaemia at high-CHD risk receiving atorvastatin 40 mg/day compared atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg (ezetimibe) vs. doubling atorvastatin to 80 mg. This post hoc analysis reports lipid efficacy results in patients grouped by diagnosis of T2DM, MetS without T2DM or neither. Per cent change from baseline at week 6 was assessed for LDL-C, total cholesterol, HDL-C , non-HDL-C , Apo A-I, Apo B and triglycerides. Safety was monitored through clinical and laboratory adverse events (AEs). RESULTS Compared with doubling atorvastatin, atorvastatin plus ezetimibe resulted in greater reductions in LDL-C, triglycerides, Apo B, non-HDL-C, total cholesterol and lipid ratios in the T2DM, MetS and neither groups. Treatment effects were of similar magnitude across patient groups with both treatments, except triglycerides, which were slightly greater in the T2DM and MetS groups vs. neither group. Changes in HDL-C , Apo A-I and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) were comparable for both treatments in all three groups. Safety and tolerability profiles were generally similar between treatments and across patient groups, as were the incidence of liver and muscle AEs. CONCLUSIONS Compared with doubling atorvastatin to 80 mg, addition of ezetimibe to atorvastatin 40 mg produced greater improvements in multiple lipid parameters in high-CHD risk patients with T2DM, MetS or neither, consistent with the significantly greater changes observed in the full study cohort (clinical trial # NCT00276484).
-
9.
Relationships between metabolic syndrome and other baseline factors and the efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin and atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypercholesterolemia.
Goldberg, RB, Guyton, JR, Mazzone, T, Weinstock, RS, Polis, AB, Tipping, D, Tomassini, JE, Tershakovec, AM
Diabetes care. 2010;(5):1021-4
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To investigate relationships between baseline factors and treatment-associated efficacy changes in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Multivariable analyses of treatment response in 1,229 type 2 diabetic patients with hypercholesterolemia who received ezetimibe/simvastatin or atorvastatin in a randomized double-blind 6-week study. RESULTS Increasing age was related to improvements in all lipid assessments. Men had greater triglyceride and non-HDL cholesterol reductions than women, and black/Hispanic patients had less favorable lipid effects than other races/ethnicities. Increasing baseline LDL cholesterol was associated with improvements in most lipids; higher baseline non-HDL cholesterol with improved HDL cholesterol and triglycerides; higher baseline HDL cholesterol with greater non-HDL cholesterol and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) reductions; and higher baseline hs-CRP with smaller LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B reductions. Patients with high baseline non-HDL cholesterol or triglycerides less frequently attained LDL cholesterol targets. Obesity was inversely related to HDL cholesterol and hs-CRP changes, and higher baseline A1C to smaller apolipoprotein B reductions. Metabolic syndrome was not a significant predictor. CONCLUSIONS Treatment responses in type 2 diabetic patients were related to baseline factors, although treatment effects (ezetimibe/simvastatin being more effective than atorvastatin) remained consistent. The presence of predictive factors should be considered in planning lipid-altering therapy.
-
10.
Safety and efficacy of combined ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment and simvastatin monotherapy in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
Abel, T, Fehér, J, Dinya, E, Eldin, MG, Kovács, A
Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research. 2009;(12):MS6-11
Abstract
BACKGROUND Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is one of the most common chronic liver diseases all over the world. In patients with a high cardiovascular risk the decrease of cholesterol level is especially important. The primary goal of this study is to observe the safety and efficacy of combined ezetimibe / simvastatin treatment and simvastatin monotherapy in patients with NAFLD and high cardiovascular risk disease. The secondary goal of this investigation was to compare the safety and efficacy of combined ezetimibe / simvastatin treatment with simvastatin monotherapy. MATERIAL/METHODS The data of 45 patients with NAFLD associated with type2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome were examined. They were diagnosed and treated in Budaörs Health Centre between 2005 and 2008. Twenty-six of the patients were treated with simvastatin (20 mg/day) and 19 individuals were given ezetimibe / simvastatin therapy (10/10 mg). The safety (aspartate-aminotransferase-AST-, alanine-aminotransferase-ALT- and creatine kinase-CK-values) and efficacy (cholesterol, low density lipoprotein-LDL- cholesterol, high density lipoprotein-HDL- cholesterol and triglyceride) of the treatments had been studied for six months of the treatment period. RESULTS Ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment resulted in a significant decrease in ALT (63.78+/-5.12 vs 32.57+/-3.92 U/L; p<0.0001) and AST (50.79+/-3.66 vs 23.68+/-3.42 U/L; p<0.0001). Simvastatin monotherapy also yielded significant decrease in ALT (66.58+/-6.13 vs 29.46+/-4.07 U/L; p<0.0001) and AST (59.61+/-5.97 vs 24.00+/-3.87 U/L; p<0.0001). Comparing the two treatment groups, simvastatin monotherapy reduced ALT (37.11+/-8.01 vs 31.21+/-7.08 U/L; p<0.0112) and AST (35.61+/-7.20 vs 27.10+/-5.22 U/L; p CONCLUSIONS These results showed that both the combined ezetimibe/simvastatin treatment and the simvastatin monotherapy proved to be effective and safe in patients with NAFLD and in cases of high cardiovascular risk.