New: NCI-funded clinical trial search
Mednet Logo

Abstract

Background

Statins reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes and slow the progression of coronary atherosclerosis in proportion to their ability to reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. However, few studies have either assessed the ability of intensive statin treatments to achieve disease regression or compared alternative approaches to maximal statin administration.

Methods

We performed serial intravascular ultrasonography in 1039 patients with coronary disease, at baseline and after 104 weeks of treatment with either atorvastatin, 80 mg daily, or rosuvastatin, 40 mg daily, to compare the effect of these two intensive statin regimens on the progression of coronary atherosclerosis, as well as to assess their safety and side-effect profiles.

Results

After 104 weeks of therapy, the rosuvastatin group had lower levels of LDL cholesterol than the atorvastatin group (62.6 vs. 70.2 mg per deciliter [1.62 vs. 1.82 mmol per liter], P<0.001), and higher levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (50.4 vs. 48.6 mg per deciliter [1.30 vs. 1.26 mmol per liter], P=0.01). The primary efficacy end point, percent atheroma volume (PAV), decreased by 0.99% (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.19 to -0.63) with atorvastatin and by 1.22% (95% CI, -1.52 to -0.90) with rosuvastatin (P=0.17). The effect on the secondary efficacy end point, normalized total atheroma volume (TAV), was more favorable with rosuvastatin than with atorvastatin: -6.39 mm(3) (95% CI, -7.52 to -5.12), as compared with -4.42 mm(3) (95% CI, -5.98 to -3.26) (P=0.01). Both agents induced regression in the majority of patients: 63.2% with atorvastatin and 68.5% with rosuvastatin for PAV (P=0.07) and 64.7% and 71.3%, respectively, for TAV (P=0.02). Both agents had acceptable side-effect profiles, with a low incidence of laboratory abnormalities and cardiovascular events.

Conclusions

Maximal doses of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin resulted in significant regression of coronary atherosclerosis. Despite the lower level of LDL cholesterol and the higher level of HDL cholesterol achieved with rosuvastatin, a similar degree of regression of PAV was observed in the two treatment groups. (Funded by AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT000620542.).

Related Questions

In ischemic stroke patients with low LDL levels (<30-50 mg/dl), would you consider lowering LDL levels to lower values without concern for any side effects?

2
5 Answers

Mednet MemberInvited Expert
Neurology · HCA Houston Healthcare

If LDL levels are already below 70, I don’t target a lower goal. The SPARCL trial showed that reducing LDL to this range has an NNT of about 45 to prevent one stroke, which I find to be modest at best. From my perspective, lowering LDL further (&lt;30-50 range) shifts the focus to treating a number rat...

Is there a preference between the different high-intensity statins for high-risk stroke patients?

5
3 Answers

Mednet MemberInvited Expert
Neurology · Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University

Atorvastatin 80 mg daily (studied in secondary stroke prevention in SPARCL) and rosuvastatin 40 mg daily are maximal approved doses for the two potent statins. These have been compared head-to-head in coronary atherosclerosis in SATURN study. The study was an atherosclerosis progression/regression s...