Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Michal Vrablík Centre for Preventive Cardiology 3 rd Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague Czech Republic.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Michal Vrablík Centre for Preventive Cardiology 3 rd Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague Czech Republic."— Presentation transcript:

1 Michal Vrablík Centre for Preventive Cardiology 3 rd Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague Czech Republic JUPITER: the Greatest but Not the Only In the Galaxy of Rosuvastatin Data Michal Vrablík Centre for Preventive Cardiology 3 rd Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague Czech Republic CARDIONALE, November 26, 2010, Prague

2 Aggressive DLP Management Reduces Risk …the Lower the Better Adapted from Ballantyne CM et al. Am J Cardiol 1998;82:3Q–12Q. LDL-C achieved mg/dL (mmol/L) WOSCOPS - Pl AFCAPS/TexCAPS - Pl ASCOT - Pl AFCAPS/TexCAPS - Rx - Rx WOSCOPS - Rx ASCOT - Rx ALLHAT - Rx ALLHAT - Pl 4S - Rx HPS - Pl LIPID - Rx 4S - Pl CARE - Rx LIPID - Pl PROSPER - Pl CARE - Pl HPS - Rx PROSPER - Rx PROSPER - Rx 0 5 10 15 20 2530 70 (1.8) 90 (2.3) 110 (2.8) 130 (3.4) 150 (3.9) 170 (4.4) 190 (5.0) 210 (5.4) Event rate (%) - Secondary prevention - Secondary prevention - Primary prevention - Primary prevention Rx - Statin therapy Pl - Placebo

3 Can you recognize them ? Statins lower LDL-c and CVD risk across all high risk population groups

4 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

5 Does rosuvastatin fulfill these requirements ?

6 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

7 Stellar study: LDL-C: Percentage Change from Baseline at Week 6 Change from baseline (%) 0-1020-30-40-50-60 10 mg -5-15-25-35-45-55 20 mg 40 mg 10 mg 20 mg 40 mg 80 mg 10 mg 20 mg 40 mg 80 mg 10 mg 20 mg 40 mg ***^^^ *** ^^^*** rosuvastatin atorvastatin simvastatin pravastatin Rosuva 10mg (-46%) Rosuva 20mg (-52%) *** p<0.001 vs rosuv 10mg ^^^p<0.002 vs rosuva 20mg Jones PH, Am J Cardiol. 2003 Jul 15;92(2):152-60

8 Stellar Study: Percentage of Patients Achieving Joint European Recommendations LDL-C Goal at Week 6 0 20 40 60 80 100 79 52 68 80 26 46 63 5 15 93 81 27 91 77 10 2040102040102040 rosuvastatinatorvastatinsimvastatinpravastatin Patients achieving LDL-C goal (%) Dose (mg) 80 2040 n=156n=158n=154n=156n=165n=162n=158n=159 n=164 n=159n=157 n=160 n=163n=165 * p<0.001 vs rosuva 10mg # p<0.001 vs rosuva 20mg ‡ p<0.001 vs rosuva 40mg LDL-C goal: <116mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) * * # ‡ # *#‡*#‡ * * *#*# # ‡ *#*# Jones PH, Am J Cardiol. 2003 Jul 15;92(2):152-60 Titration need One and First step

9 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

10 Stellar Study: HDL-C: Percentage Change from Baseline at Week 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 10204080 Dose (mg) LS mean % change from baseline rosuvastatin atorvastatinsimvastatinpravastatin Log scale Jones PH, Am J Cardiol. 2003 Jul 15;92(2):152-60

11 Stellar Study: TG: Percentage Change from Baseline at Week 6 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 10204080 Dose (mg) LS mean % change from baseline rosuvastatinatorvastatinsimvastatinpravastatin Log scale (mg) Jones PH, Am J Cardiol. 2003 Jul 15;92(2):152-60

12 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

13 Rosuvastatin: Imaging Studies

14 Rosuvasatin: Asteroid Study Let Us Take a Look Inside

15 Rosuvastatin: Asteroid - Design

16 Rosuvastatin: Asteroid Lipid changes TCTGLDLHDLapoB mmol/Lg/l 3, 4 ± 0,661, 37 ± 0,641, 57 ± 0,52 1, 27 ± 0,330, 75 ± 0,22 EOS Lipid Levels

17 And What About Atherosclerosis?

18 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

19 JUPITER TRIAL

20 JUPITER – study design Lipids CRP Tolerability Lipids CRP Tolerability HbA 1C Placebo run-in 1 –6 2 –4 3030 4 13 Final 6-monthly Visit: Week: Randomisation Lipids CRP Tolerability Rosuvastatin 20 mg (n=8901) Placebo (n=8901) Lead-in/ eligibility No history of CAD men ≥50 yrs women ≥60 yrs LDL-C <130 mg/dL CRP ≥2.0 mg/L CAD=coronary artery disease; LDL-C=low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; CRP=C-reactive protein; HbA 1c =glycated haemoglobin Median follow-up 1.9 years Ridker P et al. N Eng J Med 2008;359: 2195-2207

21 JUPITER - Study Endpoints Primary Endpoint –Time to the first occurrence of a major cardiovascular event, composite of: cardiovascular death Stroke MI unstable angina arterial revascularisation Secondary Endpoints: –total mortality –non-cardiovascular mortality –development of diabetes mellitus –development of venous thromboembolic events –bone fractures –discontinuation of study medication due to adverse effects. Ridker PM. Circulation 2003; 108: 2292–2297

22 JUPITER - Major inclusion criteria Men aged ≥50 years; women aged ≥60 years Fasting LDL-C levels  130 mg/dL (3.4 mmol/L), CRP levels ≥2.0 mg/L and TG levels  500 mg/dL (5.7 mmol/L) on initial screening Ridker PM. Circulation 2003; 108: 2292–2297

23 Age (years) 66 (60-71) 66 (60-71) Male sex (%) 61.562.1 BMI (kg/m 2 ) 28.3 (25.3-32.0) 28.4 (25.3-32.0) BP (mmHg) 134/80134/80 TC (mg/dL/mmol/L) 186 (4,8) 185 (4,8) LDL –c (mg/dL/mmol/L) 108 (2,8) 108 (2,8) HDL – c (mg/dL/mmol/L) 49 (1,3) 49 (1,3) Triglycerides (mg/dL/mmol/L) 118 (1,3) 118 (1,3) hsCRP (mg/L) 4.2 (2.8-7.1) 4.3 (2.8-7.2) Glucose (mg/dL/mmol/L) 94 (5,2) 94 (5,2) HbA 1c (%) 5.7 (5.4-5.9) 5.7 (5.5-5.9) Rosuvastatin Placebo n=8901 n=8901 JUPITER - Baseline characteristics * *All values are median (interquartile range) or N (%). Ridker P et al. N Eng J Med 2008;359: 2195-2207

24 Placebo Rosuvastatin 20 mg JUPITER - Primary Endpoint Time to first occurrence of a CV death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal MI, unstable angina or arterial revascularization Hazard Ratio 0.56 (95% CI 0.46-0.69) P<0.00001 Ridker P et al. N Eng J Med 2008;359: 2195-2207 NNT for 2y = 95 5y* = 25 *Extrapolated figure based on Altman and Andersen method 01234 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Cumulative Incidence Follow-up (years) Number at Risk Rosuvastatin Placebo 8,9018,6318,4126,5403,8931,9581,353983544157 8,9018,6218,3536,5083,8721,9631,333955534174

25 Placebo Rosuvastatin 20mg JUPITER - Total Mortality Death from any cause Hazard Ratio 0.80 (95% CI 0.67-0.97) p=0.02 Ridker P et al. N Eng J Med 2008;359: 2195-2207 01234 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 Cumulative Incidence Number at Risk Follow-up (years) Rosuvastatin Placebo 8,9018,8478,7876,9994,3122,2681,6021,192683227 8,9018,8528,7756,9874,3192,2951,6141,196684246

26 JUPITER - Dual Treatment Target Placebo 7832 (1.11) 1.00 Rosuvastatin [Dual target: LDL-C < 70mg/dL, hsCRP < 2mg/L] Dual target achieved 2685 (0.38) 0.35 0.23-0.54 Dual target not achieved 5031 (0.74) 0.64 0.49-0.84 P-value (active treatment) 0.033 P-value (trend across groups) <0.0001 LDLC ≥ 70mg/dL 2110 (0.91)0.85 0.60-1.21 LDLC < 70mg/dL5606 (0.51)0.45 0.33-0.59 P-value (trend across hsCRP strata) <0.0001 hsCRP ≥ 2mg/L 4305 (0.77)0.68 0.51-0.89 hsCRP < 2mg/L3411 (0.42)0.36 0.24-0.54 P-value (trend across LDL-C strata) <0.0001 Group N (Event rate*) HR** 95% CIP-value Ridker PM et al. The Lancet 2009. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60447-5 * Rates are per 100 person years; **Fully adjusted model controlled for age (years), baseline LDL-C (mg/dL), baseline hsCRP (mg/L), baseline HDL-C (mg/dL, blood pressure, gender, body mass index (kg/m 2 ), smoking status and parental history of premature coronary heart disease. Conversion: LDL-C < 70 mg/dL = 1.8 mmol/L HR – Hazard Ratio; CI – Confidence Interval Hazard Ratios for Incident CV Events According to Achieved Concentrations of LDL-C and hsCRP

27 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

28 JUPITER Tolerability and safety data Adverse Events, (%) Any serious adverse event15.515.20.60 Muscle weakness, stiffness, pain15.416.00.34 Myopathy0.1 0.10.82 Rhabdomyolysis 0.0 <0.1 * ---- Newly diagnosed cancer3.53.40.51 Death from cancer0.70.40.02 Gastrointestinal disorders19.219.70.43 Renal disorders5.46.00.08 Bleeding3.12.90.45 Hepatic disorders2.12.40.13 Other events, (%) Newly diagnosed diabetes ** 2.43.00.01 Haemorrhagic stroke 0.10.10.44 Placebo Rosuvastatin p-value [n=8901] [n=8901] *Occurred after trial completion; **physician reported newly diagnosed diabetes Ridker P et al. N Eng J Med 2008;359: 2195-2207

29 JUPITER Laboratory Safety Data Laboratory Values, N (%) Serum creatinine ‡ 10 (0.10) 16 (0.20)0.24 ALT > 3 x ULN # 17 (0.20) 23 (0.30)0.34 Glycosuria † 32 (0.40) 36 (0.50)0.64 Laboratory Values, median values (IQR) GFR *, (mL/min/1.73m 2 ) 66.6 (58.8-76.2) 66.8 (59.1-76.5) 0.02 % HbA1c ** 5.8 (5.6-6.1) 5.9 (5.7-6.1) 0.001 Fasting plasma glucose **, (mg/dL) 98 (90-106) 98 (91-107) 0.12 Placebo Rosuvastatin p-value [n=8901] [n=8901] GFR = Glomerular filtration rate, HbA1c = Haemoglobin A1c # on consecutive visits, ‡ >100% increase from baseline, *at 12 months, **at 24 months, †>trace at 12 months Ridker P et al. N Eng J Med 2008;359: 2195-2207

30 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

31 JUPITER – Venous Thromboembolic Events Glynn RJ et al. NEJM 2009; 360: (10.1056/NEJMoa0900241) Primary efficacy analysis, 94 cases All cases of VTE 60 (0.32) 34 (0.18)0.570.37-0.86 0.007 Unprovoked VTE 31 (0.17) 19 (0.10)0.610.35-1.090.09 Provoked VTE 29 (0.16) 15 (0.08)0.520.28-0.960.03 Pulmonary embolism 22 (0.12) 17 (0.09)0.770.41-1.450.42 Deep vein thrombosis 38 (0.20) 17 (0.09)0.450.25-0.79 0.004 Endpoint PlaceboRosuvastatinHR95% CIp-value [n=8901][n=8901] n (rate * ) n (rate * ) * Rates are per 100 person years HR – Hazard Ratio; CI – Confidence Interval VTE – venous thromboembolism Unprovoked VTE = occurred in absence of malignancy, trauma, hospitalization or surgery within 3 months before event. Provoked VTE = includes events that occurred in patients with cancer or during or shortly after trauma or surgery Occurrence of Venous Thromboembolism by Study Group

32 7 Properties of a Statin for the 21 st Century 1. Significant TC and LDL-c lowering efficacy 2. Positive impact on other lipoprotein classes 3. Slowing progression/regression of atherosclerosis 4. Reduction in CVD events/mortality 5. Good safety profile 6. Added value 7. Acceptable cost

33 Development of Statin Prices Comparison of Prices after First Introduction to Market and Current Situation

34 Rosuvastatin: a Galaxy of Evidence Most effective LDL-c lowering Favourable impact on other lipoprotein classes (TG, HDL) Evidence of slowing progression/inducing regression of atherosclerosis Evidence of CVD risk reduction (JUPITER) Satisfactory safety profile


Download ppt "Michal Vrablík Centre for Preventive Cardiology 3 rd Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague Czech Republic."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google