Clinical therapeutics · 2022
Effect of 1PC111, a Fixed-dose Combination of Pitavastatin and Ezetimibe, Versus Pitavastatin or Ezetimibe Monotherapy on Lipid Profiles in Patients With Hypercholesterolemia or Mixed Dyslipidemia: A Randomized, Double-blind, Multicenter, Phase III Study.
Рандомизированное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеКлиническое исследование III фазыСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chou Ming-Ting, McGirr Anthony, Jong Gwo-Ping, Chao Ting-Hsing, Lee I-Te, Huang Chun-Yao, Chen Ching-Pei, Hsieh Chang-Hsun, Lu Chieh-Hsiang, Sheu Wayne Huey-Herng
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to show that the efficacy of 1PC111 is superior to that of either ezetimibe or pitavastatin alone (monotherapy) for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia.
METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, Phase III study. Patients with hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia were randomized to receive 1PC111 (which was a fixed-dose combination of pitavastatin 2 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg), pitavastatin 2 mg, or ezetimibe 10 mg daily for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the difference in the percent change in LDL-C from baseline to week 12 between the 1PC111 and each monotherapy group. The secondary end points were the percent change in other lipid profiles from baseline to each visit. All patients were assessed for adverse events until end of study.
FINDINGS: A total of 388 patients were randomly assigned to the 1PC111 (n = 128), pitavastatin (n = 132), or ezetimibe (n = 128) group. Generally, baseline characteristics were similar among the 3 groups. A statistically significant decrease in the LDL-C level at week 12 was observed in the 1PC111 group (-50.50% [14.9%]) compared with either the pitavastatin (-36.11% [11.4%]; P < 0.001) or ezetimibe (-19.85% [12.4%]; P < 0.001) group. Also, there was a statistically significant difference between 1PC111 and each monotherapy group in the reduction in total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B levels. Moreover, there was a trend toward more efficient lowering of LDL-C levels in elderly patients (age ≥65 years) than in younger patients (age <65 years) by 1PC111 treatment. In patients given a class I recommendation for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention, the percentage of patients achieving the LDL-C target of <100 mg/dL at week 12 was significantly higher in the 1PC111 group than in both monotherapy groups (P < 0.001). Overall, the incidence of adverse events was similar among 3 groups.
IMPLICATIONS: 1PC111 was more effective in improving lipid profiles and achieving the LDL-C goal than pitavastatin or ezetimibe alone for hypercholesterolemia treatment. Furthermore, 1PC111 may provide more benefit in treating elderly patients.
CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04643093.
METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, Phase III study. Patients with hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia were randomized to receive 1PC111 (which was a fixed-dose combination of pitavastatin 2 mg and ezetimibe 10 mg), pitavastatin 2 mg, or ezetimibe 10 mg daily for 12 weeks. The primary end point was the difference in the percent change in LDL-C from baseline to week 12 between the 1PC111 and each monotherapy group. The secondary end points were the percent change in other lipid profiles from baseline to each visit. All patients were assessed for adverse events until end of study.
FINDINGS: A total of 388 patients were randomly assigned to the 1PC111 (n = 128), pitavastatin (n = 132), or ezetimibe (n = 128) group. Generally, baseline characteristics were similar among the 3 groups. A statistically significant decrease in the LDL-C level at week 12 was observed in the 1PC111 group (-50.50% [14.9%]) compared with either the pitavastatin (-36.11% [11.4%]; P < 0.001) or ezetimibe (-19.85% [12.4%]; P < 0.001) group. Also, there was a statistically significant difference between 1PC111 and each monotherapy group in the reduction in total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B levels. Moreover, there was a trend toward more efficient lowering of LDL-C levels in elderly patients (age ≥65 years) than in younger patients (age <65 years) by 1PC111 treatment. In patients given a class I recommendation for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention, the percentage of patients achieving the LDL-C target of <100 mg/dL at week 12 was significantly higher in the 1PC111 group than in both monotherapy groups (P < 0.001). Overall, the incidence of adverse events was similar among 3 groups.
IMPLICATIONS: 1PC111 was more effective in improving lipid profiles and achieving the LDL-C goal than pitavastatin or ezetimibe alone for hypercholesterolemia treatment. Furthermore, 1PC111 may provide more benefit in treating elderly patients.
CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04643093.