The efficacy of statin monotherapy uptitration versus switching to ezetimibe/simvastatin:results of the EASEGO study

Objective: To assess the incremental low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering efficacy of doubling the statin dose or switching to the ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 mg combination tablet (EZE/SIMVA) in patients on simvastatin 20 mg or atorvastatin 10 mg not at LDL-C target <2.5 mmol/L. Study design and methods: Patients with documented coronary heart disease (CHD) and/or type 2 diabetes (DM2) with LDL-C >= 2.5 and <5.0 mmol/L despite treatment with atorvastatin 10 mg or simvastatin 20 mg were randomized to (1) double statin dose or (2) switch to ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20, according to a PROBE study design. LDL-C, lipoprotein subfractions and safety data were assessed during the study. Results: 119 of 178 (67%) patients in the EZE/SIMVA group and 49 of 189 (26%) in the doubling statin group reached target LDL-C <2.5 mmol/L. The odds ratio of success for EZE/SIMVA versus doubling statin treatment in reaching the LDL-C target of <2.5 mmol/L was 5.7 (95% Cl: 3.7-9.0, p <0.0001). A reduction in total cholesterol (TC), total/high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol ratio and apolipoprotein B was observed in both groups, but this reduction was significantly more pronounced in the EZE/SIMVA group as compared with the doubling statin dose group. Treatment was well tolerated and no difference was observed between the two groups with regard to adverse effects. Conclusions: In CHD/DM2 patients treated with simvastatin or atorvastatin with LDL-C persistently >= 2.5 mmol/L, switching to the EZE/SIMVA was more effective in attaining the LDL-C target of <2.5 mmol/L than doubling the statin dose

Effect of EPO administration on myocardial infarct size in patients with non-STE acute coronary syndromes; results from a pilot study

A pilot study was performed to determine the effect of 40,000 IU Epo on myocardial damage in 51 patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (non-STE ACS). No significant difference in myocardial damage was found, but an increased systolic blood pressure was notice