Comparing effectiveness of high-dose Atorvastatin and Rosuvastatin among patients undergone Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A non-concurrent cohort study in India.
Adult
Aged
Atorvastatin
/ therapeutic use
C-Reactive Protein
/ analysis
Cholesterol, LDL
/ blood
Cohort Studies
Female
Gastroesophageal Reflux
Heart
Humans
Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors
/ therapeutic use
India
/ epidemiology
Lipoproteins, LDL
/ drug effects
Male
Middle Aged
Myocardial Infarction
/ drug therapy
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
/ methods
Rosuvastatin Calcium
/ therapeutic use
Treatment Outcome
Triglycerides
/ blood
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
18
11
2019
accepted:
30
04
2020
entrez:
20
5
2020
pubmed:
20
5
2020
medline:
12
8
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Atorvastatin-80mg/day and Rosuvastatin-40mg/day are the commonest high-dose statin (3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme-A reductase inhibitors) regimes for post-PCI (Percutaneous Coronary Interventions) patients to lower (by ≥50%) blood low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Dearth of conclusive evidence from developing world, regarding overall safety, tolerability and comparative effectiveness (outcome/safety/tolerability/endothelial inflammation control) of Rosuvastatin over Atorvastatin in high-dose, given its higher cost, called for an overall and comparative assessment among post-PCI patients in a tertiary cardiac-care hospital of Kolkata, India. A record-based non-concurrent cohort study was conducted involving 942 post-PCI patients, aged 18-75 years, on high-dose statin for three months and followed up for ≥one year. Those on Atorvastatin-80mg (n = 321) and Rosuvastatin-40mg (n = 621) were compared regarding outcome (death/non-fatal myocardial infarction: MI/repeated hospitalization/target-vessel revascularisation/control of LDL and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein: hsCRP), safety (transaminitis/myopathy/myalgia/myositis/rhabdomyolysis), tolerability (gastroesophageal reflux disease: GERD/gastritis) and inflammation control adjusting for socio-demographics, tobacco-use, medications and comorbidities using SAS-9.4. Groups varied minimally regarding distribution of age/gender/tobacco-use/medication/comorbidity/baseline (pre-PCI) LDL and hs-CRP level. During one-year post-PCI follow up, none died. One acute MI and two target vessel revascularizations occurred per group. Repeated hospitalization for angina/stroke was 2.18% in Atorvastatin group vs. 2.90% in Rosuvastatin group. At three-months follow up, GERD/Gastritis (2.18% vs 4.83%), uncontrolled hs-CRP (22.74% vs 31.08%) and overall non-tolerability (4.67% vs. 8.21%) were lower for Atorvastatin group. Multiple logistic regression did show that compared to Atorvastatin-80mg, Rosuvastatin-40mg regime had poorer control of hs-CRP (A3OR = 1.45,p = 0.0202), higher (A3OR = 2.07) adverse effects, poorer safety profile (A3OR = 1.23), higher GERD/Gastritis (A3OR = 1.50) and poorer overall tolerability (A3OR = 1.50). Post-PCI high dose statins were effective, safe and well-tolerated. High dose Rosuvastatin as compared to high dose Atorvastatin were similar in their clinical efficacy. Patients treated with Atrovastatin had significantly lower number of patients with hs-CRP (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein)/C-reactive protein (CRP) level beyond comparable safe limit and relatively better tolerated as opposed to Rosuvastatin-40mg.Thus given the lower price, Atorvastatin 80mg/day appeared to be more cost-effective. A head-to-head cost-effectiveness as well as efficacy trial may be the need of the hour.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32428019
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233230
pii: PONE-D-19-32015
pmc: PMC7237007
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cholesterol, LDL
0
Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors
0
Lipoproteins, LDL
0
Triglycerides
0
Rosuvastatin Calcium
83MVU38M7Q
C-Reactive Protein
9007-41-4
Atorvastatin
A0JWA85V8F
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0233230Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Circulation. 1999 Sep 7;100(10):1035-42
pubmed: 10477527
JAMA. 2001 Apr 4;285(13):1711-8
pubmed: 11277825
J Clin Lipidol. 2014 Jan-Feb;8(1):107-16
pubmed: 24528691
Circulation. 2014 Jun 24;129(25 Suppl 2):S1-45
pubmed: 24222016
Eur Heart J. 2011 Jul;32(14):1769-818
pubmed: 21712404
Am J Manag Care. 2006 Nov;12(15 Suppl):S405-11
pubmed: 17112328
N Engl J Med. 1995 Nov 16;333(20):1301-7
pubmed: 7566020
Curr Med Res Opin. 2007 Dec;23(12):3055-68
pubmed: 18196620
Eur Heart J. 2012 Jul;33(13):1635-701
pubmed: 22555213
Am J Cardiol. 2003 Jul 15;92(2):152-60
pubmed: 12860216
Circulation. 2002 Dec 17;106(25):3143-421
pubmed: 12485966
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2005 Oct;78(4):330-41
pubmed: 16198652
Am J Cardiol. 2006 Apr 17;97(8A):89C-94C
pubmed: 16581336
N Engl J Med. 1998 Nov 5;339(19):1349-57
pubmed: 9841303
JAMA. 2004 Sep 15;292(11):1307-16
pubmed: 15337732
Am J Cardiol. 2002 Feb 1;89(3):268-75
pubmed: 11809427
Can J Cardiol. 2009 Oct;25(10):567-79
pubmed: 19812802
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Mar 4;160(5):339-43
pubmed: 24474185
Am J Cardiol. 2005 Sep 5;96(5A):69F-75F
pubmed: 16126026
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2007 Feb 1;64(3):276-84
pubmed: 17244877
Am J Cardiol. 2003 Jan 1;91(1):33-41
pubmed: 12505568
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2013 Jul;6(4):390-9
pubmed: 23838105
J Lipid Res. 2009 Apr;50(4):730-9
pubmed: 19043140
Am J Manag Care. 2006 Nov;12(15 Suppl):S412-23
pubmed: 17112329
N Engl J Med. 2005 Apr 7;352(14):1425-35
pubmed: 15755765
N Engl J Med. 1999 Jul 8;341(2):70-6
pubmed: 10395630
N Engl J Med. 1996 Oct 3;335(14):1001-9
pubmed: 8801446
J Clin Lipidol. 2014 May-Jun;8(3 Suppl):S47-57
pubmed: 24793441
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 29;357(22):2248-61
pubmed: 17984166
Am Heart J. 2002 Dec;144(6):1036-43
pubmed: 12486428
Int J Cardiol. 2011 Jan 7;146(1):68-72
pubmed: 20471117
Lancet. 2009 Apr 4;373(9670):1175-82
pubmed: 19329177
JAMA. 2005 Nov 16;294(19):2437-45
pubmed: 16287954
Am Heart J. 2002 Dec;144(6):1044-51
pubmed: 12486429
Lancet. 2005 Oct 8;366(9493):1267-78
pubmed: 16214597
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Aug 1;48(3):438-45
pubmed: 16875966
Helicobacter. 2010 Dec;15(6):510-5
pubmed: 21073607
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Dec 1;54(23):2157-63
pubmed: 19664895
Am J Cardiol. 2008 Dec 15;102(12):1654-62
pubmed: 19064019
Crit Pathw Cardiol. 2013 Jun;12(2):65-105
pubmed: 23680811
Clin Ther. 2004 Nov;26(11):1821-33
pubmed: 15639694
Lancet. 1994 Nov 19;344(8934):1383-9
pubmed: 7968073
Lancet. 2002 Jul 6;360(9326):7-22
pubmed: 12114036
N Engl J Med. 2005 Jan 6;352(1):20-8
pubmed: 15635109
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008 Sep;66(3):411-3
pubmed: 18637893
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Oct 9;168(4):3715-20
pubmed: 23849964
Lancet. 2003 Apr 5;361(9364):1149-58
pubmed: 12686036
Lancet. 2008 Oct 4;372(9645):1231-9
pubmed: 18757089
Am J Cardiol. 2015 Nov 15;116(10):1521-6
pubmed: 26385518
Atherosclerosis. 2015 Apr;239(2):439-43
pubmed: 25697576
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2019 Aug 5;:2047487319868035
pubmed: 31382809
Int J Cardiol. 2011 Jan 7;146(1):56-63
pubmed: 20236716
Int J Cardiol. 2011 Oct 6;152(1):56-60
pubmed: 20674999
Atherosclerosis. 2007 Oct;194(2):e154-64
pubmed: 17229426
Circulation. 2014 Dec 23;130(25):2354-94
pubmed: 25249586
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2013 Aug;20(4):641-57
pubmed: 23447425
Am J Cardiol. 2001 Sep 1;88(5):504-8
pubmed: 11524058
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2015 Nov 27;7:555-65
pubmed: 26664148
Diabetes Care. 2009 Jun;32(6):1087-91
pubmed: 19265025
JAMA. 1998 May 27;279(20):1615-22
pubmed: 9613910
Lancet. 2010 Nov 13;376(9753):1670-81
pubmed: 21067804
N Engl J Med. 2004 Apr 8;350(15):1495-504
pubmed: 15007110
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Dec 8;54(24):2290-5
pubmed: 19958964
Chin Med J (Engl). 2012 Jul;125(13):2250-4
pubmed: 22882843