Mary E. Hanson

Lipid-altering efficacy of ezetimibe plus statin and statin monotherapy and identification of factors associated with treatment response: A pooled analysis of over 21,000 subjects from 27 clinical trials

OBJECTIVE Patients with dyslipoproteinemia constitute the largest risk group for development of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite extensive statin use, many patients with CVD risk do not achieve guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets. This pooled analysis of 27 previously published clinical trials conducted between 1999 and 2008 evaluated the lipid-altering efficacy and factors related to treatment response of ezetimibe combined with statin and statin monotherapy. METHODS Patient-level data were combined from double-blind, placebo-controlled or active comparator studies randomizing adult subjects to ezetimibe 10mg plus statin (n=11,714) versus statin alone (n=10,517) for 6-24 weeks (mean=9 weeks). Association of factors with treatment response, percent change from baseline LDL-C and other lipids, and attainment of guideline-recommended lipid and lipoprotein targets were evaluated. RESULTS Higher baseline LDL-C, diabetes mellitus, Black race, greater age, and male gender were associated with small but significantly greater percent reductions in LDL-C regardless of treatment. Treatment influenced efficacy, with ezetimibe plus statin producing significantly greater reductions in LDL-C, total-cholesterol, non-HDL-C, ApoB, triglycerides, lipid ratios, hs-CRP; significantly larger increases in HDL-C and ApoA1; and significantly higher achievement of LDL-C (<70mg/dl, <100mg/dl), non-HDL-C (<100mg/dl, <130mg/dl), and ApoB (<80mg/dl, <90mg/dl) targets than statin monotherapy at statin potencies compared (p<0.0001 for all). Differential treatment effects were seen with first-/second-line therapy and statin potency. CONCLUSION These results suggest that patient characteristics have a limited influence on response to lipid-lowering therapy and demonstrate the consistent treatment effect of ezetimibe combined with statin and statin monotherapy across a diverse patient population.

Efficacy and safety of ezetimibe added on to atorvastatin (40 mg) compared with uptitration of atorvastatin (to 80 mg) in hypercholesterolemic patients at high risk of coronary heart disease.

The percentage of change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol after the addition of ezetimibe 10 mg to atorvastatin 40 mg was compared with uptitration to atorvastatin 80 mg. In this multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study, adult hypercholesterolemic patients using atorvastatin 40 mg/day were randomly assigned to atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg or uptitration to atorvastatin 80 mg. After 6 weeks of treatment, compared with atorvastatin 80 mg, atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe significantly reduced the primary end point of LDL cholesterol by -27% versus atorvastatin 80 mg by -11% (p <0.001), as well as significantly reduced non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, and triglycerides significantly more than atorvastatin 80 mg (all p <0.001). Percentages of change in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein A-I were similar between groups. Significantly more patients treated with atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe reached LDL cholesterol <70 mg/dl versus patients treated with atorvastatin 80 mg (74% vs 32%; p <0.001). Safety and tolerability profiles and incidence of liver and muscle adverse experiences were generally similar between groups. In conclusion, these results showed that adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin 40 mg was significantly more effective than uptitrating to atorvastatin 80 mg at lowering LDL cholesterol and other lipid parameters. Both treatments were generally well tolerated (clinical trial no. NCT00276484).

Safety and Efficacy of Ezetimibe Added to Atorvastatin Versus Up Titration of Atorvastatin to 40 mg in Patients ≥65 Years of Age (from the ZETia in the ELDerly [ZETELD] Study)

Few clinical studies have focused on the efficacy of lipid-lowering therapies in patients > or = 65 years of age. The percentage of change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and the percentage of patients achieving prespecified LDL cholesterol levels after 12 weeks of ezetimibe 10 mg plus atorvastatin versus up titration of atorvastatin were assessed in subjects > or = 65 years old with hyperlipidemia and at high risk of coronary heart disease. After stabilization of atorvastatin 10-mg therapy, 1,053 patients, > or = 65 years old, at high risk of coronary heart disease, with and without atherosclerotic vascular disease and a LDL cholesterol level that was not <70 or <100 mg/dl, respectively, were randomized to receive ezetimibe added to atorvastatin 10 mg for 12 weeks versus up titration to atorvastatin 20 mg for 6 weeks followed by up titration to atorvastatin 40 mg for an additional 6 weeks. Ezetimibe added to atorvastatin 10 mg resulted in significantly greater changes at week 6 in LDL cholesterol (p <0.001), significantly more patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease achieving a LDL cholesterol level of <70 mg/dl (p <0.001), and significantly more patients without atherosclerotic vascular disease achieving a LDL cholesterol level of <100 mg/dl (p <0.001) at weeks 6 and 12 compared to atorvastatin 20 mg or atorvastatin 40 mg. In addition, ezetimibe plus atorvastatin 10 mg resulted in significantly greater changes at week 6 in total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, apolipoprotein B (all p <0.001), and HDL cholesterol (p = 0.021) compared with atorvastatin 20 mg and significantly greater changes at week 12 in LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol, apolipoprotein A-I (p = 0.001), total cholesterol, apolipoprotein B (p <0.030), and HDL cholesterol (p <0.001) compared with atorvastatin 40 mg. Both treatments were generally well tolerated, with comparable safety profiles. In conclusion, adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin 10 mg produced significantly greater favorable changes in most lipids at 6 and 12 weeks and significantly greater attainment of prespecified LDL cholesterol levels than doubling or quadrupling the atorvastatin dose in patients > or =65 years old at high risk for coronary heart disease.

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

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.

Are post-treatment low-density lipoprotein subclass pattern analyses potentially misleading?

BackgroundSome patients administered cholesterol-lowering therapies may experience an increase in the proportion of small LDL particles, which may be misinterpreted as a worsening of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk. This study assessed the lipid effects of adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin or doubling the atorvastatin dose on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (and the cholesterol content of LDL subclasses), LDL particle number (approximated by apolipoprotein B), and LDL particle size. This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study of hypercholesterolemic, high atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk patients. After stabilization of atorvastatin 40 mg, 579 patients with LDL-C >70 mg/dL were randomized to 6 weeks of ezetimibe + atorvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg. Efficacy parameters included changes from baseline in LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and lipoprotein subclasses (Vertical Auto Profile II) and pattern for the overall population, as well as patient subgroups with baseline triglyceride levels <150 mg/dL or ≥150 mg/dL.ResultsBoth treatments significantly reduced LDL-C (and the cholesterol content of most LDL subfractions [LDL1-4]) apolipoprotein B, non-HDL-C levels, but did not reduce the proportion of smaller, more dense LDL particles; in fact, the proportion of Pattern B was numerically increased. Results were generally similar in patients with triglyceride levels <150 or ≥150 mg/dL.ConclusionsWhen assessing the effects of escalating cholesterol-lowering therapy, effects upon Pattern B alone to assess coronary heart disease risk may be misleading when interpreted without considerations of other lipid effects, such as reductions in LDL-C, atherogenic lipoprotein particle concentration, and non-HDL-C levels.Trial Registration(Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: Clinical trial # NCT00276484)

A comparison of efficacy and safety of an ezetimibe/simvastatin combination compared with other intensified lipid-lowering treatment strategies in diabetic patients with symptomatic cardiovascular disease

The low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering efficacy of switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZ/S) 10/20 mg versus doubling the run-in statin dose (to simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg) or switching to rosuvastatin 10 mg in subjects with cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes was assessed. Endpoints included percentage change in LDL-C and percentage of patients achieving LDL-C <70 mg/dL. Significantly greater reductions in LDL-C occurred when switching to EZ/S versus statin doubling in the overall population and in subjects treated with simvastatin 20 mg or atorvastatin 10 mg (all p < 0.001). The LDL-C reduction was numerically greater when switching to EZ/S versus switching to rosuvastatin (p = 0.060). Significantly more subjects reached LDL-C <70 mg/dL with EZ/S (54.5%) versus statin doubling (27.0%) or rosuvastatin (42.5%) in the overall population (all p < 0.001) and within each stratum (all p < 0.001). Switching to EZ/S provided significantly greater reductions in LDL-C versus statin doubling and significantly greater achievement of LDL-C targets versus statin doubling or switching to rosuvastatin.

Response by sex to statin plus ezetimibe or statin monotherapy: A pooled analysis of 22,231 hyperlipidemic patients

BackgroundDespite documented benefits of lipid-lowering treatment in women, a considerable number are undertreated, and fewer achieve treatment targets vs. men.MethodsData were combined from 27 double-blind, active or placebo-controlled studies that randomized adult hypercholesterolemic patients to statin or statin+ezetimibe. Consistency of treatment effect among men (n = 11,295) and women (n = 10,499) was assessed and percent of men and women was calculated to evaluate the between-treatment ability to achieve specified treatment levels between sexes.ResultsBaseline lipids and hs-CRP were generally higher in women vs. men. Between-treatment differences were significant for both sexes (all p < 0.001 except apolipoprotein A-I in men = 0.0389). Men treated with ezetimibe+statin experienced significantly greater changes in LDL-C (p = 0.0066), non-HDL-C, total cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL-C, apolipoprotein A-I (all p < 0.0001) and apolipoprotein B (p = 0.0055) compared with women treated with ezetimibe+statin. The odds of achieving LDL-C < 100 mg/dL, apolipoprotein B < 90 mg/dL and the dual target [LDL-C < 100 mg/dL & apoliprotein B < 90 mg/dL] was significantly greater for women vs. men and the odds of achieving hs-CRP < 1 and < 2 mg/L and dual specified levels of [LDL-C < 100 mg/dL and hs-CRP < 2 mg/L] were significantly greater for men vs. women. Women reported significantly more gall-bladder-related, gastrointestinal-related, and allergic reaction or rash-related adverse events (AEs) vs. men (no differences between treatments). Men reported significantly more CK elevations (no differences between treatments) and hepatitis-related AEs vs. women (significantly more with ezetimibe+simvastatin vs. statin).ConclusionsThese results suggest that small sex-related differences may exist in response to lipid-lowering treatment and achievement of specified lipid and hs-CRP levels, which may have implications when managing hypercholesterolemia in women.

Safety profile of statins alone or combined with ezetimibe: a pooled analysis of 27 studies including over 22,000 patients treated for 6–24 weeks

Aims:  The aim of this analysis was to assess the overall safety and tolerability profiles of various statins + ezetimibe vs. statin monotherapy and to explore tolerability in sub‐populations grouped by age, race, and sex.

Ezetimibe/simvastatin vs simvastatin in coronary heart disease patients with or without diabetes

BackgroundTreatment guidelines recommend LDL-C as the primary target of therapy in patients with hypercholesterolemia. Moreover, combination therapies with lipid-lowering drugs that have different mechanisms of action are recommended when it is not possible to attain LDL-C targets with statin monotherapy. Understanding which treatment or patient-related factors are associated with attaining a target may be clinically relevant.MethodsData were pooled from two multicenter, randomized, double-blind studies. After stabilization on simvastatin 20 mg, patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) alone and/or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were randomized to ezetimibe 10 mg/simvastatin 20 mg (EZ/Simva) or simvastatin 40 mg. The change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), TC/HDL-C ratio, triglycerides, and the proportion of patients achieving LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) after 6 weeks of treatment were assessed, and factors significantly correlated with the probability of achieving LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L in a population of high cardiovascular risk Italian patients were identified. A stepwise logistic regression model was conducted with LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L at endpoint as the dependent variable and study, treatment, gender, age (≥65 years or < 65 years), as independent variables and baseline LDL-C (both as continuous and discrete variable).ResultsEZ/Simva treatment (N = 93) resulted in significantly greater reductions in LDL-C, TC, and TC/HDL-C ratio and higher attainment of LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L vs doubling the simvastatin dose to 40 mg (N = 106). Study [including diabetic patients (OR = 2.9, p = 0.003)], EZ/Simva treatment (OR = 6.1, p < 0.001), and lower baseline LDL-C (OR = 0.9, p = 0.001) were significant positive predictors of LDL-C target achievement. When baseline LDL-C was expressed as a discrete variable, the odds of achieving LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/L was 4.8 in favor of EZ/Simva compared with Simva 40 mg (p < 0.001), regardless of baseline LDL-C level.ConclusionEZ/Simva is an effective therapeutic option for patients who have not achieved recommended LDL-C treatment targets with simvastatin 20 mg monotherapy.Trial RegistrationClinical trial registration numbers: NCT00423488 and NCT00423579

Ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/40 mg versus atorvastatin 40 mg in high cardiovascular risk patients with primary hypercholesterolemia: a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter study

BackgroundA considerable number of patients with severely elevated LDL-C do not achieve recommended treatment targets, despite treatment with statins. Adults at high cardiovascular risk with hypercholesterolemia and LDL-C ≥ 2.59 and ≤ 4.14 mmol/L (N = 250), pretreated with atorvastatin 20 mg were randomized to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/40 mg or atorvastatin 40 mg for 6 weeks. The percent change in LDL-C and other lipids was assessed using a constrained longitudinal data analysis method with terms for treatment, time, time-by-treatment interaction, stratum, and time-by-stratum interaction. Percentage of subjects achieving LDL-C < 1.81 mmol/L, < 2.00 mmol/L, or < 2.59 mmol/L was assessed using a logistic regression model with terms for treatment and stratum. Tolerability was assessed.ResultsSwitching to ezetimibe/simvastatin resulted in significantly greater changes in LDL-C (-26.81% vs.-11.81%), total cholesterol (-15.97% vs.-7.73%), non-HDL-C (-22.50% vs.-10.88%), Apo B (-17.23% vs.-9.53%), and Apo A-I (2.56% vs.-2.69%) vs. doubling the atorvastatin dose (all p ≤ 0.002), but not HDL-C, triglycerides, or hs-CRP. Significantly more subjects achieved LDL-C < 1.81 mmol/L (29% vs. 5%), < 2.00 mmol/L (38% vs. 9%) or < 2.59 mmol/L (69% vs. 41%) after switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin vs. doubling the atorvastatin dose (all p < 0.001). The overall safety profile appeared generally comparable between treatment groups.ConclusionsIn high cardiovascular risk subjects with hypercholesterolemia already treated with atorvastatin 20 mg but not at LDL-C < 2.59 mmol/L, switching to combination ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/40 mg provided significantly greater LDL-C lowering and greater achievement of LDL-C targets compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose to 40 mg. Both treatments were generally well-tolerated.Trial registrationRegistered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00782184