|
ISSN 0947 - 8736 European Journal of Clinical Research
|
|
|
STATINS AND MYOTOXICITY:
POTENTIAL MECHANISMS AND
John A. Farmer, M.D. and Guillermo Torre-Amione, M.D., Ph.D.
Abstract
The advent of pharmacologic agents which lower cholesterol by the
competitive inhibition of the rate limiting enzyme in cholesterol synthesis (hydroxymethylglutyral
coenzyme A reductase) have markedly improved the ability of the clinician to
optimize the lipid profile in subjects with dyslipidemia.
Statin therapy has been available for almost 15 years and has been
documented to reduce cardiovascular mortality in large-scale controlled
clinical trials. The safety
profile of statins has been extensively evaluated and the major clinically
significant adverse effects encountered with the use of these agents has been
induction of elevation of liver enzymes and muscle toxicity.
The extreme form of muscle toxicity (rhabdomyolysis) has been reported
both with statin monotherapy and in combination with other pharmacologic
agents. The precise mechanism of
statin induced myotoxicity is unknown but may involve problems associated with
intrinsic (albeit poorly defined) properties of the specific drug utilized.
Additionally, genetic,
pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions may also be involved.
Rhabdomyolysis with statin monotherapy is rare but may be increased
significantly with the coadministration of other agents such as gemfibrozil or
inhibitors of the cytochrome P450 enzyme system.
Cerivastatin was determined to be associated with an increased risk of
myotoxicity despite inherent pharmacologic properties which would appear to be
protective. Cerivastatin has a
dual mechanism of excretion via the utilization of the cytochrome P450 enzyme
system (2C9 and 3A4) which theoretically imparted a reduced risk for drug
interaction. However, despite the
favorable metabolic pathways, rhabdomyolysis cases were reported with
increasing frequency following the release of cerivastatin.
The risk for rhabdomyolysis was especially increased with the
combination of cerivastatin and gemfibrozil, which carried a specific
contraindication by the United States Federal Drug Administration and
subsequently resulted in the removal of cerivastatin from the market.
This review will discuss the clinical spectrum and comparative aspects
of statin associated myotoxicity. I.
Introduction
The
age adjusted mortality for cardiovascular disease has been decreasing in the
United States for the past two decades [1].
The precise cause for this encouraging improvement in the prognosis for
coronary artery disease is multifactorial
and has been variably attributed to both advancements in the management of
acute coronary syndromes and risk factor modification.
Dyslipidemia plays a central role in the atherosclerotic process and
was difficult to optimize prior to the advent of inhibitors of
hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (statins). Statin therapy has been available for 15 years and has been
proven to be of clinical benefit in efficacy trials which utilized these
agents in both the primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerosis.
Additionally, statin therapy has been demonstrated to improve total
mortality in studies which were performed with adequate statistical power.
However, both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies entail a
certain degree of risk and therapeutic interventions are most appropriately
utilized with a precise knowledge of a clinically validated benefit to risk
ratio. This review will focus on
the muscular toxicity associated with statin use and provides a comparative
overview of the various agents. II.
Mechanisms of Rhabdomyolysis
Muscle toxicity was one of the first major adverse drug reactions which
was associated with statin therapy. The
clinical spectrum of muscle abnormalities associated with the use of statins
ranges from a mild clinical syndrome consisting of nonspecific myalgias to
life threatening rhabdomyolysis. Rhabdomyolysis
is a clinical syndrome with a variety of potential causes including trauma,
infection, toxins, genetic abnormalities and drugs. The clinical consequences of rhabdomyolysis are secondary to
diffuse damage of the myocyte sarcolemmal membranes and subsequent massive
cell lysis. The resultant
myonecrosis is characterized by the release of a variety of enzymes into the circulation including creatine kinase (CK) and
aldolase. Additionally,
potassium, myoglobin, creatinine and other predominantly intracellular
constituents also enter the plasma compartment.
The clinical sequelae of muscular breakdown includes myoglobinuria and
the potential for irreversible renal failure, complex cardiac arrhythmias and
local compartment syndromes due to intracellular fluid shifts.
Creatine kinase elevations and myoglobinuria are frequently utilized
for the preliminary diagnosis of rhabdomyolysis.
The potential risk of developing rhabdomyolysis due to any cause may be
at least partially genetically mediated.
Enzyme deficiencies may be associated with increased risk for the
development of rhabdomyolysis and include genetically mediated abnormalities
in phosphorylase, phosphofructokinase, carnitine palmitoyltransferase and
myoadenalate deaminase. The
diagnosis of these rare enzyme abnormalities is difficult and generally
requires biopsy evidence of muscle histopathology and the subsequent
determination of enzyme activity. However,
approximately 25% of patients with recurrent rhabdomyolysis may have an
underlying genetic predisposition [2]. III.
Statins and Rhabdomyolysis
The precise mechanism by which statin therapy is associated with muscle
toxicity is unknown, although intrinsic pharmacologic properties of the
various statins and potential interactions with coadministered drugs have been
implicated. The primary mechanism
of action of statin therapy is to competitively inhibit the activity of
hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG Co A) reductase which is the rate
limiting enzyme in cholesterol synthesis.
Reduction in the activity of this key enzyme also results in a
secondary intracellular depletion of a variety of metabolic intermediates
which are generated in the process of cholesterol synthesis.
The depletion of metabolic intermediates (e.g., mevolonate, ubiquinone,
farnesol, geranylgeraniol) have been postulated to potentially play a role in
statin associated myotoxicity [3]. Statins
with increased lipophilic properties, which allow increased penetration of the
cell, may result in a significant reduction of these metabolic intermediates
which are required for the post-translational (isoprenylation) modification of
a variety of regulatory proteins. The
mouse C2-C12 myoblast has been utilized as a model to determine the effects of
statin therapy on cellular viability
and the potential association with reduced cholesterol synthesis [4].
Pravastatin is relatively hydrophilic and has been demonstrated to
penetrate striated muscle cells poorly. The
administration of pravastatin at a dose level of 200
M/l had little
effect on the synthesis of cellular
cholesterol levels when compared to the relatively lipophilic lovastatin.
Additionally, simvastatin and lovastatin administration decreased the
viability of the myoblast by 50%. However,
the results of animal studies utilizing in vitro preparations are difficult to
extrapolate to humans. Human
studies are limited in the direct elucidation of the mechanisms involved in
statin associated muscle toxicity.
Determination of circulating levels of a variety of synthetic
intermediates in the cholesterol synthetic pathway have been performed.
However, the results do not conclusively determine a direct
relationship between statins and rhabdomyolysis.
Ubiquinone (coenzyme Q) is an important cofactor for cellular
mitochondrial respiration. Coenzyme Q-10 has been demonstrated to be a redox link
between flavoproteins and the cytochrome system which is required for the
synthesis of adenosine triphosphate and is essential in cellular energy
production. Coenzyme Q-10 is
lipophilic and distributed in both skeletal muscle and the myocardium and may
also play a role in membrane stabilization.
Simvastatin therapy administered to dyslipidemic subjects has been
demonstrated to reduce the circulating plasma level of coenzyme Q.
Additionally, the coenzyme Q to cholesterol ratio was also lower when
compared to healthy controls [5]. However,
pravastatin and atorvastatin differ considerably in tissue penetration but
were not demonstrated to significantly alter the circulating levels of
coenzyme Q-10 despite significant reductions in lipid levels.
The clinical implications of the statin mediated reduction in plasma
levels of coenzyme Q levels are unclear.
The hypothesis that reduced circulating levels of plasma coenzyme Q-10
translate into intramitochondrial abnormalities and cellular dysfunction as a
mechanism to increase the risk of rhabdomyolysis
has been investigated in human subjects.
Simvastatin was administered to 19 hypercholesterolemic patients who
subsequently underwent direct muscle biopsy following a six-month treatment
period [6]. Muscle high energy
phosphate determinations and coenzyme Q levels were assayed but were found not
to be different from baseline or from healthy control which did not support
the hypothesis that the potential for altered isoprenylate synthesis or energy
generation in the myocytes represents a significant clinical factor following
simvastatin administration in hypercholesterolemic subjects. Large-scale clinical studies also have demonstrated
that clinically significant myopathy following the administration of
lipophilic statins is associated with a very low incidence of myopathy. A recent analysis of the simvastatin megatrials demonstrated
an overall incidence of muscular toxicity of 0.025% [7]. Additionally, rhabdomyolysis has been reported with all
statins irregardless of lipophilicity and large-scale clinical safety trials
which directly compare statins with differing properties relative to tissue
penetration have not been performed.
Considerable interest has been generated concerning the potential role
of statin interaction with the cytochrome P450 enzyme system and the risk of
muscle toxicity [8]. The
cytochrome P450 system is a ubiquitous group of related enzymes that
oxidatively modify pharmacologic agents with conversion to a more water
soluble form which allows renal excretion.
The cytochrome P450 enzyme system is predominantly localized within the
liver and intestinal tract. The
cytochrome enzyme system, which accounts for the metabolism of a significant
proportion of clinically utilized
medications, is accounted for by six isoforms (CYP 1A2, 2C9, 2C19, 2D8, 2E1,
3A4). However, the cytochrome 3A4 isoform accounts for the
metabolism of approximately 50% of all commonly used drugs. Lovastatin, simvastatin and atorvastatin are metabolized by
the CYP 3A4 isoform. Fluvastatin
is predominantly metabolized by the CYP 2C9 while cerivastatin has a dual
mechanism of excretion which utilizes the CYP 2C9 and 3A4 pathway.
Pravastatin is unique in that the cytochrome P450 system is not
utilized and this agent is metabolized by a non-p450 mechanism.
The potential for myotoxicity is significantly increased when drugs
which are metabolized by the cytochrome P450 3A4 isoform are coadministered
with inhibitors of this enzyme system. Mibefradil,
which was developed as a calcium channel blocking agent, significantly
inhibited the activity of the 3A4 enzyme system.
The combination of mibefradil and simvastatin was associated with a
significant incidence of severe rhabdomyolysis and resulted in the removal
from the market of this agent [9]. Additionally,
the coadministration of drugs which are both metabolized by the identical
cytochrome P450 enzyme system may also result in a potentially adverse drug
interaction due to an increase in circulating levels.
However, despite the increase in the amount of data relative to
pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics
and genetics, the mechanism by which statins cause myopathy is not precisely
known which resulted in increased reliance on clinical experience and
post-release surveillance studies to determine the relative risk of induced
myopathies alone and in combination.
The interaction between statins and the fibric acid derivatives has
received considerable clinical interest due to the frequent utilization of
both classes in subjects with combined hyperlipidemia.
The metabolism of the fibric acid derivatives is complex and the
precise pathways are controversial. The
fibrates have been reported to be metabolized by the 3A4 pathway [10].
However, this is not
universally accepted and the exact mechanism involved in the metabolism and
subsequent renal excretion of the fibrates is not universally agreed upon.
The coadministration of gemfibrozil and statins which are metabolized
by the CYP 3A4 isoform (e.g., simvastatin) have been demonstrated to result in
an increase in the total area under the curve for both simvastatin and its
active form simvastatin acid [11]. Gemfibrozil
has not been demonstrated to inhibit cytochrome 3A4 in vitro and the
pharmacologic interaction with statins may be mediated by a mechanism which
does not involve the P450 system. Cerivastatin
has a dual mechanism of excretion which involves more than one hepatic
cytochrome P450 pathway which had been proposed as a mechanism which
presumably would result in a low propensity for drug interaction. Additionally, fluvastatin which is predominantly metabolized
by the 2C9 system may have a different spectrum of drug interactions when
compared to statins which exclusively utilize the 3A4 system.
Pravastatin is unique in the HMG Co A reductase inhibitors in that it
does not utilize the cytochrome P450 system for metabolism and may provide a
basis for reduced incidence of drug interaction.
Pravastatin is excreted in the bile or by renal mechanisms following
the formation of a 3-alpha-hydroxy isomeric metabolite. However, despite theoretic mechanisms involved in the
predisposition for statin induced myotoxicity, the mechanism involving the
statin-fibrate interaction is unknown. The
risk of rhabdomyolysis in combination therapy utilizing a fibric acid
derivative and a statin ranges from 1-5% and the mechanism is potentially
multifactorial [12]. The
interaction may be due to pharmacodynamic considerations rather than a
predominantly pharmacokinetic mechanism.
Fibric acid derivatives may adversely affect hepatic function resulting
in reduced clearance of orally administered statins from the portal
circulation with a secondary increase in concentration and risk for
rhabdomyolysis. Additionally,
renal insufficiency may be associated with decreased clearance of the fibric
acid derivatives which are predominantly eliminated by the kidney and result
in an increased risk of rhabdomyolysis. IV.
Evidence from Clinical Trials
The lack of a unifying hypothesis which explains the mechanism of a
potential for a rare but life threatening complication such as rhabdomyolysis
requires extensive clinical experience to estimate the risk benefit
ratio for statin therapy. The first generation statins (lovastatin, pravastatin,
simvastatin) were derived as metabolites from fungal cultures and are similar
in chemical structure. The first
generation statins have been extensively evaluated in large-scale clinical
endpoint trials which clearly demonstrated a significant reduction in
cardiovascular endpoints. Additionally,
the clinical trials provided a large database which permits safety analysis
for both common and relatively rare adverse effects (e.g., liver function
abnormalities and muscle toxicity). The
five major clinical trials which evaluated the first generation statins
enrolled over 29,000 patients and the occurrence of rhabdomyolysis was
analyzed as a safety parameter in all studies.
The largest experience is with pravastatin and the cumulative safety
results were recently combined in the Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project
(PPPP) which accumulated a total experience in excess of 112,000 patient years
of monitored drug exposure by combining the results of the Cholesterol and
Recurrent Events (CARE), West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS),
and the Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID)
[13]. The pooled results of these
three landmark trials were monitored for myotoxicity and documented that three
pravastatin and seven placebo subjects were withdrawn due to an elevation in CK levels. Despite the withdrawal from the studies, no cases of
rhabdomyolysis were reported in the Pravastatin Pooling Project.
The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) was the first
large-scale statin trial to demonstrate a reduction in total mortality in
concert with declines in cardiovascular endpoints [14].
The 4S study compared simvastatin to placebo over a six year period in
4,444 patients in a secondary prevention trial.
Creatine kinase levels were determined every six months on a routine
basis and an increase of 10 times above the upper limits of normal occurred in
6 simvastatin subjects although the enzyme level was not associated with a
symptom complex compatible with rhabdomyolysis.
Definite muscle toxicity which fit both clinical and enzymatic criteria
for rhabdomyolysis occurred in 1 subject who received simvastatin and was
reversible following discontinuation of the drug.
Rhabdomyolysis did not occur in the placebo group and 1 patient was
withdrawn due to asymptomatic elevations of creatine kinase.
The Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TEXCAPS)
was a large-scale primary prevention trial which evaluated a cohort of 6,605
subjects with a relatively modest risk factor profile.
The average cholesterol in the AFCAPS/TEXCAPS group was 221 mg/dl (5.71
mmol/L) which was associated with an HDL cholesterol of 36 mg/dl (0.94
mmol/L). Lovastatin therapy
resulted in a decrease in the primary endpoint which was a composite outcome
measurement and included first major coronary event (fatal or nonfatal
myocardial infarction, unstable angina or sudden cardiac death). Creatine kinase levels were monitored during the study and an
incidence of CK elevations which were in excess of 10 times the upper limit of
normal was documented to be identical in the lovastatin and placebo groups
(0.6%) [15]. Further safety
analysis documented two cases of rhabdomyolysis in patients who received
placebo and one case in the group randomized to receive lovastatin. Interestingly, the single case of rhabdomyolysis which
occurred in a patient randomized to the lovastatin group occurred when the
subject was off active therapy but was included for statistical purposes since
the trial was analyzed on an intent to treat basis [16].
Muscle toxicity did not occur in patients who received lovastatin
therapy in combination with drugs which were known inhibitors of the
cytochrome P450 3A4 system. Fluvastatin
and atorvastatin have not been studied in similar long-term clinical endpoint
trials although safety data is available from the MIRACL and LCAS studies.
The MIRACL trial randomized 3,086 adults to receive atorvastatin or
placebo in a trial involving acute ischemic syndromes but was short term in
that an evaluation period of 16 weeks was utilized due to ethical reasons.
Myositis was not documented in any patients in this relatively brief
trial [17]. The Lipoprotein and
Coronary Atherosclerosis Study (LCAS) evaluated fluvastatin in a relatively
small (429 subjects) trial over a 2.5 year period [18].
Rhabdomyolysis was not reported in association with fluvastatin therapy.
Thus, large-scale clinical trial with the first generation statins
demonstrated a significant reduction in cardiovascular endpoints with a risk
of muscle toxicity which was not significantly different from placebo.
Additionally, while not as well studied, the lipophilic synthetic
second generation statins (fluvastatin and atorvastatin) have not been
associated with significant rates of rhabdomyolysis. V.
The Special Case of Cerivastatin
Cerivastatin was developed as a highly potent inhibitor of HMG Co A
reductase activity and could be administered in microgram doses.
Cerivastatin is a pure enantiomeric reductase inhibitor which has been
evaluated in clinical efficacy in safety studies since 1993 [19].
Cerivastatin utilizes the cytochrome P450 3A4 and 2C8 isozymes and have
been advocated as an agent which would be associated with a low propensity for
drug interactions [20]. Clinical
studies have demonstrated that cerivastatin is totally absorbed following oral
administration and subsequently undergoes moderate first pass hepatic
metabolism. Cerivastatin was determined to be exclusively metabolized by
the cytochrome P450 enzyme system with the resultant metabolites being cleared
by biliary and renal excretion. However,
despite the theoretic benefits imparted by the dual mechanism of excretion,
clinical studies demonstrated a potential for drug interactions with
cyclosporine, erythromycin and intraconazole.
Pre-marketing clinical trials utilized doses up to 0.4 mg/day and did
not indicate increased risk for rhabdomyolysis. However, surveillance studies which were performed following
the release of cerivastatin documented an increased incidence of
rhabdomyolysis, especially when cerivastatin was coadministered with
gemfibrozil and resulted in the United States Food and Drug Administration
issuing a specific contraindication to the combination of cerivastatin and
gemfibrozil. The incidence of
rhabdomyolysis continued to increase and a total of 52 deaths were recorded
worldwide which resulted in the removal of cerivastatin from the marketplace
[21]. The United States accounted for 31 deaths and 12 of the case
fatalities involved the combination of gemfibrozil and cerivastatin despite
the issuance of clinical warnings concerning the dangers of combination
therapy. Additionally, a
significant number of the rhabdomyolysis cases occurred with cerivastatin
monotherapy which was employed at a higher dose (0.8 mg/day) which had
recently been approved for clinical usage.
Interestingly, a long-term efficacy and safety study which analyzed the
effectiveness of the 0.8 mg dose of cerivastatin has been published following
the removal of cerivastatin from the marketplace [22].
The investigators analyzed 1,170 subjects over a 52-week period and
randomized the individuals to placebo, cerivastatin 0.4 mg/day and
cerivastatin 0.8 mg/day. Following
an 8-week trial period, the placebo group was switched to pravastatin 40
mg/day. Creatine kinase and
muscular symptoms were analyzed as a safety endpoint.
Creatine kinase elevations and symptomatology were divided into three
categories (CK>5-10x upper limits of normal without symptoms, CK>10x
upper limits of normal without symptoms, CK>10x upper limits of normal with
symptoms). Following the 52-week
trial period, no patient who received the 8 weeks of placebo followed by 44
weeks of pravastatin therapy had a CK elevation > 10x the upper limits of
normal associated with symptoms
of myositis. Conversely, 8
patients who were dosed for 52 weeks with 0.8 mg/day of cerivastatin had a CK
elevation > 10x the upper limits of normal associated with symptoms.
Additionally, a CK elevation >10x the upper limits of normal which
was asymptomatic occurred in one of the patients in the pravastatin group and
16 patients who received cerivastatin 0.8 mg/day. The authors concluded that the long-term use of cerivastatin
0.8 mg/day effectively and safely bring the majority of patients to National
Cholesterol Education Program goals, although it would appear that myotoxicity
was increased in the cerivastatin group.
The fatal rhabdomyolysis cases associated with cerivastatin have
prompted the European Medicine Evaluation Agency to undertake the first
comprehensive evaluation of statins since their debut into clinical use almost
15 years ago. Clinical benefits
will be correlated with the risk of therapy and an appropriate clinical
benefit to risk ratio will be established which should provide important
information as to role of the administration of statins in the treatment of
patients with either increased risk for the development of symptomatic
coronary disease or in the presence of established atherosclerosis.
However, the need for further basic research into the mechanisms
involved in statin associated rhabdomyolysis is necessary and the implications
of genetic, pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic and structure-function
relationships of these agents should be encouraged in light of the potential
for statin usage to increase from 13 to 36 million recipients in the United
States if the recommendations of the Adult Treatment Panel - III of the
National Cholesterol Education Program are implemented [23]. VI.
Summary
Muscle toxicity was one of the first major events associated with the
administration of statin therapy. Rhabdomyolysis
with statin monotherapy had a low incidence (<0.1%) although the risk is
increased in combination with agents such as gemfibrozil.
The mechanism by which statin therapy alone or in combination is
associated with rhabdomyolysis has not been elucidated.
Genetic predisposition may play a role.
However, drug interactions by coadministration of statins with agents
that inhibit the cytochrome P450 3A4 enzyme system are associated with a
marked increase in overall risk for rhabdomyolysis.
The precise role of genetic, pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic and
structure function relationships have not been elucidated and will require
further basic research directed at unraveling this mechanism in order to
insure maximum safety.
CK >
10x ULM
References 1.
American Heart Association.
Heart and Stroke Facts 2002 2.
Lofberg M, Jankala H, Paetau A.
Metabolic causes of recurrent
rhabdomyolysis. Acta
Neurol Scand 1998; 98(4):268-75. 3.
Flint OP, Masters BA, Gregg RE, Durham SK.
HMG Co A reductase
inhibitor induced myotoxicity:
pravastatin and lovastatin inhibit the
geranylgeraniolation of low molecular weight proteins in
neonatal rat muscle
cell culture. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1997; 145(1):99-110. 4.
Gadbut AP, Caruso AT, Galper JB.
Differential sensitivity of C2C12
striated muscle to lovastatin and pravastatin.
J Mol Cell Cardiol 1995;
10:2397-402. 5.
Watts GS, Castelluccio C, Rice-Evans C, et al.
Plasma coenzyme Q
concentration in patients treated with simvastatin.
J
Clin Pathol 1993;
46(11):55-7. 6. Laaksonen
R, Jokelainen K, Saudi-Shi T, et al.
Decreases in serum
ubiquinone concentrations do not result in reduced levels in
human
muscle tissue during short-term simvastatin treatment in humans.
Clin Pharmacol Ther 1995; 57(1):62-6. 7.
Gruer EJ, Vega JM, Mercuri MF, Dobrinska MR, Tobert JA. Concomitant
use of cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitors and simvastatin. Am J Cardiol
1999; 84(7):811-5. 8.
Davidson MH. Does
differing metabolism by cytochrome P450 add
clinical importance? Curr
Atheroscler Rep 2000; 1:14-19. 9.
Schmassmann-Suhijar D, Bullingham R, Gasser R, Schmutz J,
Haefeli
WE. Rhabdomyolysis due to interaction of simvastatin with
mibefradil.
Lancet
1998; 351:1929-30. 10. Miller DB, Spence JD.
Clinical
pharmacokinetics of fibric acid
derivatives (fibrates). Clin
Pharmacokinet 1998; 34(2):155-62. 11.
Backman JT, Kyrklund C, Kivisto KT, Wang JS, Neuvonen EJ.
Plasma concentrations of active simvastatin acid are increased
by
gemfibrozil. Clin
Pharmacol Ther 2000; 68(2):122-9. 12.
Omar MA, Wilson JP, Cox PS.
Rhabdomyolysis and HMG Co A
reductase inhibitors. Ann
Pharmacother 2001; 35(9):1096-107. 13.
Pfeifer MA, Keech A, Sacks FN, Cobbe SM, Poknin A, Byington RP,
Davis
DR, Friedman CT, Braunwald E. Safety
and tolerability of
pravastatin in long-term clinical trials:
Pravastatin Pooling Project.
Eur Heart J 2001; 22(Abstr Suppl):271. 14.
Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group.
Randomised trial of
cholesterol lowering in 4,444 patients with coronary heart
disease: the
Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S).
Lancet 1994; 344:1383-9. 15.
Downs JR, Clearfield M, Weis S, Whitney E, Shapiro DR, Bere PA,
Langendorfer A, Stein EA, Kruyer W, Gotto AM.
Primary prevention of
acute coronary events with lovastatin in men and women with
average
cholesterol levels. JAMA
1998; 279:1615-22. 16.
Downs JR, Clearfield M, Pyroler HA, Whitney EJ, Kruyer W,
Langendorfer
A, Zagrebelsky V, Weis S, Shapiro DR, Bere PA, Gotto AM.
Air
Force/Texas Coronary
Atherosclerosis Prevention Study
(AFCAPS/TEXCAPS): Additional
prospectives on tolerability of long-term
treatment with lovastatin.
Am J Cardiol 2001; 87:1074-9. 17.
Schwartz GG, Olsson AG, Ezekowitz MD, Ganz P, Oliver MF, Waters
D,
Zeiher
A, Chaitman BR, Leslie S, Stern T.
Effects of atorvastatin on early
recurrent ischemic events and acute coronary syndromes.
The MIRACL
Study: a
randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2001; 285:1711-18. 18.
Hurd JA, Ballantyne CM, Farmer JA, Ferguson JJ, Jones EH, West
MS,
Jould
KL, Gotto AM. Effect of
fluvastatin on coronary atherosclerosis in
patients with mild to moderate cholesterol elevations (Lipoprotein
and
Coronary Atherosclerosis Study
[LCAS]). Am J Cardiol
1997;
80(3):278-86. 19.
Stein EA. Extending
therapy options in treating lipid disorders.
A clinical
review of cerivastatin, a novel HMG Co A reductase inhibitor.
Drugs
1998; 56(Suppl. 1):25-31. 20.
Mück W. Rational
assessment of the interaction profile of cerivastatin
supports its low propensity for drug interactions.
Drugs 1998;
56 (Suppl. 1):15-23. 21. SoRelle
R. Baycol
withdrawn from market. Circulation
2001;
104(8):E9015-6. 22.
The Cerivastatin Group. Long-term
efficacy and safety of cerivastatin
0.8 mg. in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia. Clin Cardiol 2001;
24(Suppl. IV):IV-1
- IV-9. 23.
Executive Summary of the third report of the National
Cholesterol Education
Program (NCEP) expert panel on detection, evaluation and
treatment of high blood cholesterol in adults (Adult Treatment
Panel III).
JAMA 2001; 285(19):2468-97. John
A. Farmer, M.D. Associate
Professor of Medicine Baylor
College of Medicine Chief,
Section of Cardiology Ben
Taub General Hospital One
Baylor Plaza, Room 525D Houston,
Texas 77030 jfarmer@bcm.tmc.edu Guillermo
Torre-Amione, M.D., Ph.D. Assistant
Professor of Medicine Baylor
College of Medicine Medical
Director, Heart Transplant Service The
Methodist Hospital 6550
Fannin Street, Suite 1901 Houston,
Texas 77030 gtorre@bcm.tmc.edu |
|