Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9160173›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics1997

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

H Lennernäs, G Fager

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00978419 (Randomized, Placebo Controlled, Pilot Trial of Statin Use in Burn Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 138 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
138citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
18.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00978419 phase2completednot on this mapstarted 2010, after this paper: background citation

Randomized, Placebo Controlled, Pilot Trial of Statin Use in Burn Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorVanderbilt University Medical CenterRan2010 to 2011Enrolled40ConditionsBurnsArmsRosuvastatin, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

138 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 525 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Differences in synthesis and absorption of cholesterol of two effective lipid-lowering therapies.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2012 · on this map
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. International journal of molecular medicine · 2026
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

78 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H LennernäsDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Sweden. hans.lennernas@biof.uu.se
G Fager
Uppsala University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsAnticholesteremic AgentsArteriosclerosisBrainEnzyme InhibitorsFatty Acids, MonounsaturatedFluvastatinFood-Drug InteractionsHumansHypercholesterolemiaIndolesLiverLovastatinPravastatinSimvastatinAnticholesteremic AgentsEnzyme InhibitorsFatty Acids, MonounsaturatedFluvastatinHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsIndolesLovastatinPravastatinSimvastatin

Identifiers

PMID9160173
OpenAlexW2032890774

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.