Literature DB >> 9160173

Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. Similarities and differences.

H Lennernäs1, G Fager.   

Abstract

Hypercholesterolaemia plays a crucial role in the development of atherosclerotic diseases in general and coronary heart disease in particular. The risk of progression of the atherosclerotic process to coronary heart disease increases progressively with increasing levels of total serum cholesterol or low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol at both the individual and the population level. The statins are reversible inhibitors of the microsomal enzyme HMG-CoA reductase, which converts HMG-CoA to mevalonate. This is an early rate-limiting step in cholesterol biosynthesis. Inhibition of HMG-CoA reductase by statins decreases intracellular cholesterol biosynthesis, which then leads to transcriptionally upregulated production of microsomal HMG-CoA reductase and cell surface LDL receptors. Subsequently, additional cholesterol is provided to the cell by de novo synthesis and by receptor-mediated uptake of LDL-cholesterol from the blood. This resets intracellular cholesterol homeostasis in extrahepatic tissues, but has little effect on the overall cholesterol balance. There are no simple methods to investigate the concentration-dependent inhibition of HMG-CoA reductase in human pharmacodynamic studies. The main clinical variable is plasma LDL-cholesterol, which takes 4 to 6 weeks to show a reduction after the start of statin treatment. Consequently, a dose-effect rather than a concentration-effect relationship is more appropriate to use in describing the pharmacodynamics. Fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin have similar pharmacodynamic properties; all can reduce LDL-cholesterol by 20 to 35%, a reduction which has been shown to achieve decreases of 30 to 35% in major cardiovascular outcomes. Simvastatin has this effect at doses of about half those of the other 3 statins. The liver is the target organ for the statins, since it is the major site of cholesterol biosynthesis, lipoprotein production and LDL catabolism. However, cholesterol biosynthesis in extrahepatic tissues is necessary for normal cell function. The adverse effects of HMG-reductase inhibitors during long term treatment may depend in part upon the degree to which they act in extrahepatic tissues. Therefore, pharmacokinetic factors such as hepatic extraction and systemic exposure to active compound(s) may be clinically important when comparing the statins. Different degrees of liver selectivity have been claimed for the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. However, the literature contains confusing data concerning the degree of liver versus tissue selectivity. Human pharmacokinetic data are poor and incomplete, especially for lovastatin and simvastatin, and it is clear that any conclusion on tissue selectivity is dependent upon the choice of experimental model. However, the drugs do differ in some important aspects concerning the degree of metabolism and the number of active and inactive metabolites. The rather extensive metabolism by different cytochrome P450 isoforms also makes it difficult to characterise these drugs regarding tissue selectivity unless all metabolites are well characterised. The effective elimination half-lives of the hydroxy acid forms of the 4 statins are 0.7 to 3.0 hours. Protein binding is similar (> 90%) for fluvastatin, lovastatin and simvastatin, but it is only 50% for pravastatin. The best characterised statins from a clinical pharmacokinetic standpoint are fluvastatin and pravastatin. The major difference between these 2 compounds is the higher liver extraction of fluvastatin during the absorption phase compared with pravastatin (67 versus 45%, respectively, in the same dose range). Estimates of liver extraction in humans for lovastatin and simvastatin are poorly reported, which makes a direct comparison difficult.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9160173     DOI: 10.2165/00003088-199732050-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet        ISSN: 0312-5963            Impact factor:   6.447


  97 in total

1.  ML-236A, ML-236B, and ML-236C, new inhibitors of cholesterogenesis produced by Penicillium citrinium.

Authors:  A Endo; M Kuroda; Y Tsujita
Journal:  J Antibiot (Tokyo)       Date:  1976-12       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Interaction between fibre and lovastatin.

Authors:  W O Richter; B G Jacob; P Schwandt
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1991-09-14       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 3.  Regulation of the mevalonate pathway.

Authors:  J L Goldstein; M S Brown
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1990-02-01       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of pravastatin alone and with cholestyramine in hypercholesterolemia.

Authors:  H Y Pan; A R DeVault; B J Swites; D Whigan; E Ivashkiv; D A Willard; D Brescia
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  Lovastatin. Warfarin interaction.

Authors:  S Ahmad
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1990-11

6.  Multiple-dose pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of atorvastatin, an inhibitor of HMG-CoA reductase, in healthy subjects.

Authors:  D D Cilla; L R Whitfield; D M Gibson; A J Sedman; E L Posvar
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 6.875

7.  Steady state serum concentrations of pravastatin and digoxin when given in combination.

Authors:  J Triscari; B N Swanson; D A Willard; A I Cohen; A Devault; H Y Pan
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 8.  Coronary artery disease regression. Convincing evidence for the benefit of aggressive lipoprotein management.

Authors:  H R Superko; R M Krauss
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 9.  Interactions with hydroxymethylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors.

Authors:  W R Garnett
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  1995-08-01       Impact factor: 2.637

10.  Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group.

Authors:  J Shepherd; S M Cobbe; I Ford; C G Isles; A R Lorimer; P W MacFarlane; J H McKillop; C J Packard
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1995-11-16       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  105 in total

Review 1.  Drug interactions and the statins.

Authors:  R J Herman
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1999-11-16       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  The potential for drug interactions with statin therapy in Ireland.

Authors:  A Heerey; M Barry; M Ryan; A Kelly
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2000 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.568

3.  Investigation of the mutual pharmacokinetic interactions between bosentan, a dual endothelin receptor antagonist, and simvastatin.

Authors:  Jasper Dingemanse; Dieter Schaarschmidt; Paul L M van Giersbergen
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 6.447

4.  Time effects of food intake on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of quazepam.

Authors:  Norio Yasui-Furukori; Takenori Takahata; Tsuyoshi Kondo; Kazuo Mihara; Sunao Kaneko; Tomonori Tateishi
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 5.  Conceptual foundations of the UCSD Statin Study: a randomized controlled trial assessing the impact of statins on cognition, behavior, and biochemistry.

Authors:  Beatrice Alexandra Golomb; Michael H Criqui; Halbert White; Joel E Dimsdale
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2004-01-26

6.  Effect of statins on lipoprotein receptor expression in cell lines from human mast cells and basophils.

Authors:  Shuren Li; Robert Dudczak; Elisabeth Koller; Mehrdad Baghestanian; Minoo Ghannadan; Erich Minar; Christian Pirich; Peter Angelberger; Irene Virgolini; Mei Li; Peter Valent
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2003-09-10       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 7.  Trends in oral drug bioavailability following bariatric surgery: examining the variable extent of impact on exposure of different drug classes.

Authors:  Adam S Darwich; Kathryn Henderson; Angela Burgin; Nicola Ward; Janet Whittam; Basil J Ammori; Darren M Ashcroft; Amin Rostami-Hodjegan
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 8.  Effects of the antifungal agents on oxidative drug metabolism: clinical relevance.

Authors:  K Venkatakrishnan; L L von Moltke; D J Greenblatt
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.447

9.  Steady-state pharmacokinetics of pravastatin in children with familial hypercholesterolaemia.

Authors:  Heleen E Wiersma; Albert Wiegman; Richard P Koopmans; Henk D Bakker; John J P Kastelein; Chris J van Boxtel
Journal:  Clin Drug Investig       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.859

Review 10.  Pharmacokinetic comparison of the potential over-the-counter statins simvastatin, lovastatin, fluvastatin and pravastatin.

Authors:  Pertti J Neuvonen; Janne T Backman; Mikko Niemi
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 6.447

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.