SCH 48461, an inhibitor of gastrointestinal absorption of cholesterol, was evaluated for its effects on lipid parameters in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia in a multicenter, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐group study. Following the baseline phase, which consisted of a 2‐ to 10‐week drug washout and dietary stabilization phase and a 4‐week placebo lead‐in (placebo baseline phase), 190 patients were randomized to an 8‐week double‐blind active drug (SCH 48461 1, 6.25, 25, 100, 200, or 400 mg) or 40 mg lovastatin once daily each morning or placebo treatment phase. By week 2, patients who received SCH 48461 6.25 to 400 mg or lovastatin demonstrated greater reduction from baseline in directly measured low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) levels than patients in the placebo group (p ≤ 0.03). Overall, the percent reductions in LDL‐C from baseline increased as the dose of SCH 48461 increased, with 0.6% to 15.5% reductions from the minimum dose of 1 mg to the maximum dose of 400 mg. Lovastatin 40 mg/day reduced LDL‐C by 30.7% (p < 0.01). Statistically significant decreases were also seen for total cholesterol and apolipoprotein B (apo B) with doses of 25 mg to 400 mg of SCH 48461 and lovastatin. SCH 48461 was well tolerated. There was a similar incidence of adverse events in each SCH 48461‐ or lovastatin‐treated group compared to placebo. This study demonstrated a clinically and statistically significant cholesterol‐lowering effect of SCH 48461 in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.

In view of the role of both the de novo biosynthesis and receptor-mediated uptake of cholesterol for normal steroidogenesis, we evaluated whether extending the therapeutic dose of the hepatic hydroxymethyl glutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor, simvastatin, to 80 mg/d would affect adrenal and gonadal steroid synthesis in men with hypercholesterolemia. To evaluate this question, we enrolled men into a multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled study lasting 12 weeks. Men with serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) more than 145 mg/dL after 6 weeks of a lipid-lowering diet were randomized to 80 mg simvastatin or placebo. Half of the subjects were asked to undergo a 6-hour infusion of corticotropin (ACTH) to evaluate cortisol synthesis, and the entire cohort received a human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) stimulation test to assess gonadal hormone secretion using pooled serum samples taken 15 minutes apart. A total of 81 men (age, 45 ± 11 years; 93% Caucasian) with baseline serum LDL-C of 197 mg/dL (placebo, n = 39) and 184 mg/dL (simvastatin 80 mg, n = 42) completed the study. After 12 weeks, serum LDL-C, triglycerides, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) in the simvastatin group changed by −43%, −25%, and 8%, respectively (all P < .001). The basal cortisol level and the peak serum cortisol and area under the curve response to the 6-hour ACTH infusion were comparable between the two treatment groups at baseline and after 12 weeks. The pooled total testosterone level at baseline was 541 and 513 ng/dL in the placebo and simvastatin-treated groups, respectively, which declined to 536 ± 20.5 ng/dL (−1.5%) and 474 ± 30.4 ng/dL (−13.6%, P = .09) after treatment (mean ± SD). The pooled free testosterone declined by 6.3% in the simvastatin group, versus a 4.9% increase in the placebo group (P = .588), while pooled bioavailable testosterone declined 10.2% in the simvastatin group and increased 1.4% in the placebo group (P = 035). There were no changes in serum gonadotropin levels or sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG). After administration of hCG, there were no differences in the peak total pooled testosterone level before or after 12 weeks of treatment. Simvastatin 80 mg was well tolerated compared with placebo. In conclusion, basal and stimulated cortisol production was unaffected by the use of simvastatin 80 mg versus placebo. As reported with other statins and cholestyramine, there were small declines in the simvastatin-treated group for pooled total, free, and bioavailable testosterone after 12 weeks, although there was no compensatory increase in serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) or luteinizing hormone (LH) levels.

This randomized, multicenter, double-blind parallel-group study was performed to evaluate the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of simvastatin 80 mg/day, a dose twice the current maximum recommended dose. At 20 centers in the United States, 521 male and female hypercholesterolemic patients were randomly assigned in a ratio of 2:3 to receive simvastatin 40 or 80 mg once daily, respectively, for 24 weeks in conjunction with a lipid-lowering diet. Patients met National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol criteria for pharmacologic treatment. The mean percentage reductions (95% confidence intervals) from baseline in LDL cholesterol averaged at weeks 18 and 24 were 38% (-40 to -36) and 46% (-47 to -45) for the 40- and 80-mg groups, respectively (p <0.001 between groups). One third of patients on the 40- and 80-mg doses achieved an LDL cholesterol reduction of 46% and > or = 53%, respectively. Decreases in apolipoprotein B, total cholesterol, and triglycerides were also significantly greater among patients receiving 80 mg/day. Simvastatin was well tolerated in both groups. Two patients (0.6%) in the 80-mg group developed myopathy. Consecutive, clinically significant hepatic transaminase elevations occurred in 3 (1.0%) and 6 (1.9%) patients in the 40- and 80-mg groups, respectively (p= 0.486). In conclusion, simvastatin 80 mg/day provided substantial reductions in LDL cholesterol, allowing most patients to reach their NCEP target levels; it also had an excellent safety and tolerability profile.

The short-term effectiveness of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) apheresis using a dextran sulfate cellulose adsorption column technique was previously examined in a 9- center, 22-week controlled trial in 64 patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) who did not adequately respond to diet and drug therapy. Forty-nine patients (40 treatment, 9 controls) subsequently received LDL apheresis procedures as part of an optional follow-up phase. This study reports on the long-term safety, lipid lowering, and clinical efficacy of LDL apheresis for the 5-year period that includes both the initial controlled study and follow-up phase. During this time, patients received a total of 3,902 treatments of which 3,314 treatments were given during the follow-up phase. Adverse events were infrequent, occurring in 142 procedures (3.6%). Immediate reduction in LDL cholesterol was 76% both in homozygotes and in heterozygotes. Patients with homozygous FH had a progressive decrease in pretreatment LDL cholesterol level along with an increase in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level. There was no appreciable change in pretreatment lipoprotein level over time in heterozygotes. The rate of cardiovascular events during therapy with LDL apheresis and lipid-lowering drugs was 3.5 events per 1,000 patient-months of treatment compared with 6.3 events per 1,000 patient-months for the 5 years before LDL apheresis therapy. These findings support the long-term safety and clinical efficacy of LDL apheresis in patients with heterozygous and homozygous FH who are inadequately controlled with drug therapy.

Patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (HFH) have abnormalities in both low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor alleles, resulting in severe hypercholesterolaemia and premature coronary heart disease. Limited treatment options are available and the response to drug therapy has been poor. In the present paper, we have evaluated the efficacy and safety of simvastatin at doses beyond the current maximal dose of 40 mg/day in patients with HFH. After a 4 week placebo diet run-in period, 12 patients with well-characterized HFH were randomized to simvastatin 80 mg/day administered in three divided doses (n=8; group 1) or 40 mg once daily (n=4; group 2). After 9 weeks, the dose in group 1 was increased to 160 mg/day while the dose in group 2 was kept at 40 mg/day, but with the drug given in three divided doses and treatment continued for an additional 9 weeks. All 12 patients completed the study and there were no serious or unexpected adverse effects. LDL-cholesterol concentrations fell by 14% at the 40 mg/day dose, but were reduced further at the higher doses (25% at the 80 mg/day and by 31% at the 160 mg/day dosage, P<0.0001). Excretion of urinary mevalonic acid, as an index of in vivo cholesterol biosynthesis, was reduced but did not correlate with reduction in LDL-cholesterol in the individual patients. The magnitude of response to therapy was not predicted by the LDL-receptor gene defect as patients with the same LDL-receptor mutations responded differently to the same dose of simvastatin therapy. The ability of expanded doses of simvastatin (80 or 160 mg/day) to reduce LDL-cholesterol levels in patients with HFH, even if receptor negative, suggests that at these doses, the drug reduces LDL production. Simvastatin therapy, at doses of 80 or 160 mg/day, should therefore be considered in all patients with HFH, either as an adjunct to apheresis, or as monotherapy for those patients who do not have access to apheresis or other such treatment modalities.

The hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor simvastatin is the most effective of the currently approved hypolipidemic drugs and has been shown to reduce mortality and coronary morbidity in patients with coronary artery disease. For these patients the United States National Cholesterol Education Program advocates reducing low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol to <100 mg/dl. However, in some patients this cannot be achieved using monotherapy with simvastatin 40 mg/day, the current maximal recommended dose. To evaluate the effectiveness of extending the dosage range, 156 subjects with LDL cholesterol > 160 mg/dl and triglycerides (TG) < 350 mg/dl were randomized to simvastatin at doses of 40, 80, and 160 mg/day in a 26 week, double-blind, 3-period, complete block crossover study. Each active treatment period was 6 weeks in duration with intervening 2 week washout periods. Median reductions from baseline in LDL cholesterol were 41%, 47%, and 53% in the 40-, 80-, and 160-mg groups, respectively. The corresponding reductions in plasma TG were 21%, 23%, and 33%. High-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol increased by 6% to 8% in each group. One patient (0.7%) taking 160 mg developed myopathy; 1 patient (0.7%) taking 80 mg, and 3 (2.1%) taking 160 mg had transaminase elevations > 3 times the upper limit of normal. No new or unexpected adverse effects were observed. We conclude that simvastatin at doses of 80 and 160 mg/day provides additional efficacy with a low short-term incidence of adverse effects; our results support the continued investigation of simvastatin at these doses.

BACKGROUND:Niacin and lovastatin are both effective drugs for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and are among the drugs of first choice recommended by the adult treatment panel. To date, however, no studies have directly compared the lipoprotein-modifying effects and safety of lovastatin and niacin across their usual dosage range in patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.METHODS:The efficacy and safety of lovastatin and niacin were compared in a controlled, randomized, open-label study of 26 weeks' duration that was conducted at five lipid clinics. One hundred thirty-six patients with primary hypercholesterolemia participated in the study. Entry criteria were a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level greater than 4.37 mmol/L (160 mg/dL) with coronary heart disease and/or more than two coronary heart disease risk factors or an LDL cholesterol level greater than 5.19 mmol/L (190 mg/dL) in patients without coronary heart disease or less than two coronary heart disease risk factors. The study consisted of a 4-week diet run-in period after which eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive treatment with either lovastatin (20 mg/d) or niacin (1.5 g/d) for 10 weeks. On the basis of the LDL cholesterol response and patient tolerance, the doses were sequentially increased to 40 and 80 mg/d of lovastatin or 3 and 4.5 g/d of niacin after 10 and 18 weeks of treatment, respectively.RESULTS:In the two patient groups, 66% of patients treated with lovastatin and 54% of patients treated with niacin underwent full dosage titration. At all time points, lovastatin was significantly (P < .01) more effective than niacin in reducing LDL cholesterol levels (26% vs 5% at week 10, 28% vs 16% at week 18, and 32% vs 23% at week 26), whereas niacin was more effective (P < .01) in increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (6% vs 20% at week 10, 8% vs 29% at week 18, and 7% vs 33% at week 26). Niacin reduced Lp(a) lipoprotein levels by 35% at week 26, whereas lovastatin had no effect. Cutaneous flushing was the most common side effect during treatment with niacin.CONCLUSIONS:Lovastatin and niacin both exerted favorable dose-dependent changes on the concentrations of plasma lipids and lipoproteins. Lovastatin was more effective in reducing LDL cholesterol concentrations, whereas niacin was more effective in increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations and reducing the Lp(a) lipoprotein level. Lovastatin was better tolerated than niacin, in large part because of the common cutaneous side effects of niacin.

Backgrounds: Treatment of severe hypercholesterolemia often requires high-dose therapy with a hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitor alone or in combination with bile acid-binding resin. We evaluated the efficacy and safety, of pravastatin, a new hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitor with hydrophilic selectivity, alone and in combination with cholestyramine.Methods: Pravastatin was studied at doses of 20 or 40 mg twice daily alone or 20 mg twice daily with cholestyramine, 12 g twice daily, vs placebo in a randomized, double-blind multicenter study of 311 patients for 8 weeks and in continued therapy through 24 weeks.Results: After 8 weeks of therapy, pravastatin in a dosage of 20 mg twice daily reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels by 31%, whereas a dosage of 40 mg twice daily reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels by 38%. Cholestyramine, 24 g daily alone, reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels by 32%. Cholestyramine combined with 40 mg of pravastatin reduced the level by 51%. Pravastatin, 40 or 80 mg daily, reduced the triglyceride level by 13% to 19%, resin alone increased the triglyceride level by 21%, and no change was seen with combined therapy. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels increased by about 5% regardless of regimen. Similar effects were seen at 24 weeks. Symptoms reported were indistinguishable among placebo and pravastatin users and were less than with cholestyramine alone or cholestyramine in combination with pravastatin. Elevations of liver enzyme levels were small in all groups, indistinguishable between resin and pravastatin, and were highest when the two drugs were combined. Plasma creatine kinase levels did not increase in any treatment group.Conclusions: Pravastatin treatment of hypercholesterolemia is highly effective and well tolerated alone and in combination with bile acid-binding resin and shows no tendency to increase muscle enzyme levels.

Background: Inhibitors of hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase are widely used to treat hypercholesterolemia. They have a good short- to medium-term safety profile, but long-term safety data are limited.Methods: Seven hundred forty-five patients with severe hypercholesterolemia (mean baseline plasma cholesterol level on diet, 9.3 mmol/L [360 mg/dL]) were treated with lovastatin for a median duration of 5.2 years. Their mean age at baseline was 50 years, 68% were male, 60% had familial hypercholesterolemia, and 42% had a history of coronary heart disease. Seventy-seven percent of patients had titrations of lovastatin to 80 mg/d, and 58% took other lipid-lowering agents, usually bile acid sequestrants, concomitantly.Results: The mean changes at 5 years in total, low-density lipoprotein, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were -35%, -44%, and +14%, respectively. Eighty percent of patients completed the study, 13% were unavailable for follow-up, 4% were discontinued due to adverse events unlikely to be related to lovastatin, and 3% (21) were discontinued because of drug-attributable adverse events: marked but asymptomatic increase in aminotransferase values (10 patients), gastrointestinal disturbance (three patients), rash (two patients), myalgia (one patient), myopathy (two patients), arthralgia (one patient), insomnia (one patient), and weight gain (one patient). Sixteen patients died during the study, all of coronary disease. Of these, 14 had coronary heart disease at baseline. There were no deaths attributable to trauma, suicide, or homicide, and there were only 14 cases of cancer (vs 21 expected). There was no evidence for an adverse effect on the lens.Conclusions: Lovastatin is a generally well-tolerated and effective drug during long-term use.