Search

Background: Statins are widely prescribed for the management of hyperlipidemia and the prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Atorvastatin and rosuvastatin are among the most commonly used statins, with varying impacts on lipid profiles, side effect profiles, patient adherence, and health-care costs. Understanding these differences within specific populations can inform more tailored and cost-effective treatment strategies. Aims and Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the differences in side effect management, patient outcomes, and health-care costs between atorvastatin and rosuvastatin therapies in a cohort from Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India. Materials and Methods: An observational study was conducted with 100 patients at the Karpagam Faculty of Medical Sciences and Research, evenly split between atorvastatin (n=50) and rosuvastatin (n=50) groups. Data on demographic characteristics, side effects, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol reduction, medication adherence, and health-care costs were collected and analyzed. Results: The cohort had an average age of 62 years, with a higher prevalence of males (57%). Socioeconomic analysis showed 30% from low-income, 50% from middle-income, and 20% from highincome backgrounds. Side effects were more common in the atorvastatin group (35%) compared to the rosuvastatin group (28%), with muscle pain and gastrointestinal issues being predominant. Rosuvastatin treatment resulted in higher adherence rates (90%) and more significant LDL cholesterol reduction but incurred higher annual health-care costs (INR 28,000) versus atorvastatin (INR 25,000) (P=0.04). Conclusion: Both statins effectively reduced LDL cholesterol; however, rosuvastatin demonstrated higher patient adherence but at an increased cost. These findings underscore the need for individualized statin therapy that considers both clinical outcomes and economic constraints, particularly in settings with limited health-care resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Atorvastatin is one of the common drugs used for primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. Various studies have suggested variation in C-reactive Protein (CRP) value, glycaemic status and liver enzymes of patients following statin therapy. However, the adequate and exact data regarding the impact of atorvastatin on the above parameters in the population of Eastern India is still limited. Aim: To estimate the effect of atorvastatin on CRP, glycaemic status and haepatic enzymes of non diabetic patients. Materials and Methods: A prospective longitudinal observational study was conducted in the Outpatient Department (OPD) of Internal Medicine at Midnapore Medical College and Hospital, Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal, India. The duration of the study was one year six months, from June 2020-December 2021. A total of 150 non diabetic patients aged between 30-75 years receiving atorvastatin were enrolled in the present study. Patients with known Diabetes Mellitus (DM), impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, pregnancy and lactation were excluded. CRP, Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS), Postprandial Blood Sugar (PPBS), haepatic enzymes and lipid profile of participants were monitored at baseline, at the end of one month, six months and 12 months. The data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.0, Microsoft Excel and GraphPad Prism. Results: The study population were predominantly males (69.6%), with mean age of 54±8.88 years and mean weight of 60±5.86 kg. Majority of the patients were on atorvastatin 40 mg (60.86%) followed by atorvastatin 20 mg (26.8%) and atorvastatin 10 mg (12.3%). There were statistical significant changes of mean CRP (1.502 mg/L), mean FBS (86.52 mg/dL), mean PPBS (113.57 mg/dL), mean Serum Glutamic-oxaloacetic Transaminase (SGOT) (22.84 IU/L), mean Serum Glutamic Pyruvic Transaminase (SGPT) (25.24 IU/L) and lipid profile levels at the end of one year. None of the patients developed new onset DM at the end of one year. A 5% of patients developed prediabetes at the end of 3rd follow-up. Conclusion: Atorvastatin usage showed that, there was a significant increase in blood glucose and haepatic enzymes level in non diabetic population. Hence, strict monitoring of blood glucose levels along with periodic monitoring of haepatic enzyme levels should be done in regular intervals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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). Conclusion: 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the details of a research study to compare the haemoglobin A1c levels in hypertensive patients treated with and without atorvastatin statins. Details related to the materials and methods used for this research, along with the patient profile and the results of the study, are presented.

What is known and objective Statins form the backbone of lipid-lowering therapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, there is large interindividual variability in clinical response to statin treatment. Several gene variants that can be aligned to either the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of statin have been proposed as potentially important determinants of statin response. We aimed to study the association of known variations in SLCO1B1, CYP3A4, ABCB1, CYP3A5, ABCG5 and CYP7A1 genes with lipid levels in response to atorvastatin therapy. Methods Genotypes were determined using multiplex allele-specific polymerase chain reaction in 177 Indian patients, treated with 10 mg of atorvastatin for 8 weeks. Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol ( LDL-C) levels were recorded at baseline and after 8 weeks of atorvastatin treatment. Results and Discussion A total of 177 hypercholesterolaemic patients were genotyped to study genetic determinants of atorvastatin response. The genotype distribution for all polymorphisms investigated was in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. In our study, patients with wild-type genotypes of CYP7A1 (rs3808607), CYP3A4 (rs2740574), SLCO1B1 (rs2306283) and variant allele-carrying genotype of ABCB1 (rs2032582, rs1045642) showed significantly greater LDL-cholesterol reductions in response to atorvastatin therapy. What is new and conclusion The variable response to atorvastatin therapy in terms of LDL-cholesterol lowering due to genetic variations in CYP7A1, CYP3A4, SLCO1B1 and ABCB1 is a promising finding. Further validation in large Indian cohorts is required before it can be assessed for clinical utility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effect of statins on memory and psychomotor function has been controversial and needs further evaluation. Aims: To evaluate the effect of atorvastatin on memory and psychomotor functions in hypertensive patients treated with enalapril or amlodipine. Settings and Design: Prospective, comparative, non-randomized, before-after, open-label clinical study conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Western India. Materials and Methods: Memory was evaluated with PGI (Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh) Memory Scale, while psychomotor functions were evaluated with Digit Letter Substitution test, Six Letter Cancellation test, and Finger Tapping test at baseline, 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months of starting atorvastatin in 74 hypertensive patients who were prescribed either enalapril or amlodipine with or without atorvastatin 10 mg/day. Scores obtained in patients receiving enalapril or amlodipine were compared with those receiving these drugs along with atorvastatin. Memory and psychomotor functions of 12 healthy volunteers were also evaluated and compared with those of the patients at respective time periods. Statistical Analysis: Student's t test, Wilcoxon Signed Rank test, and Mann Whitney U test were used to compare the pre- and post-treatment scores of memory and psychomotor functions in various groups. Statistical significance was considered at P<0.05. Results: A statistically significant improvement in scores of memory and psychomotor functions was observed in both healthy volunteers (P=0.009 and P=0.016) and hypertensive patients (P=0.008 and P=0.031) throughout the study period. Memory and psychomotor function in hypertensive patients remained significantly inferior to those of healthy volunteers (P=0.01 and P=0.018). There was no significant difference in the scores of memory and psychomotor functions between patients receiving atorvastatin and those not receiving this drug. Conclusion: Atorvastatin, at 10 mg/day dose, does not have any significant effect on memory and psychomotor functions in hypertensive patients treated with enalapril or amlodipine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dyslipidemias are on the rise and are increasingly being treated with statins. As the metabolism of cholecalciferol and cholesterol are interrelated, reduction in cholesterol synthesis by statins is likely to affect Vitamin D status., Objectives: (1) The aim is to study the effect of treatment with statins (Atorvastatin/Rosuvastatin) on 25-hydroxy-Vitamin-D (25OHD) among newly detected subjects with dyslipidemia for 6 months (2) To study the impact of 25OHD concentrations on the efficacy of statin treatment., Materials and Methods: This was a prospective, balanced randomized (1:1), open-label, parallel-group study, in apparently healthy Indian adult men (south Asian, 40-60 years). At baseline, serum lipids and 25OHD concentrations were measured. Based on the Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines, subjects were divided as per lipid concentrations into controls (who did not require statin treatment) and intervention (who required statin treatment) groups. Random allocation of subjects was done in two groups for receiving intervention for 6 months: Atorvastatin group (n = 52, received Atorvastatin) or Rosuvastatin group (n = 52, received Rosuvastatin). Lipids and 25OHD concentrations were measured at the end line., Results: Atorvastatin group presented significant reduction (P < 0.05) in 25OHD, total cholesterol (TC) and low-density-lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations at the end line. In the Rosuvastatin group, significant drop in TC, LDL-C and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (concentrations (P < 0.05) was observed, while 25OHD concentrations showed no significant change. Mean 25OHD concentrations were significantly correlated with a reduction in LDL-C concentrations in Atorvastatin group., Conclusions: Treatment with Atorvastatin resulted in a reduction in 25OHD concentrations; further, its efficacy in reducing LDL-C concentrations was related to the 25OHD concentrations., Competing Interests: None

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the impact of medicines price regulation (Drug Price Control Order, 2013) on the market share of atorvastatin in the Indian retail market for statins., Setting: All Indian states, January 2012 to December 2015., Design: Quasi-experimental-interrupted time series analysis., Data: Pharmaceutical sales audit data set from IMS Health (now IQVIA) for the 48-month period from January 2012 to December 2015., Outcome Measure: Share of atorvastatin (in percentage) in the Indian market for statins in terms of sales volumes., Results: We observed that the price regulation notification (Drug Price Control Orders, 2013) was associated with 0.12% (p<0.001; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.18) increase in the trend of the average monthly market share of atorvastatin (5 mg and 10 mg). After 31 months of price ceilings notification, the average market share of atorvastatin was 3.41% higher than would have been expected had the price ceilings not been notified. In sensitivity analysis, with a control, our findings remain robust, we observed a 0.16% (p<0.001; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.24) rise in the trend of average monthly market share of atorvastatin (5 mg and 10 mg) as compared with the change in the control., Conclusions: Price control as a public intervention did improve the relative sales of atorvastatin in the statin market in India., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)