More potent lipid-lowering effect by rosuvastatin compared with fluvastatin in everolimus-treated renal transplant recipients

Abstract

Background: Dyslipidemia is a risk factor for premature cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in renal transplant recipients (RTRs). Pharmacotherapy with mTOR inhibitors aggravates dyslipidemia, thus necessitating lipid-lowering therapy with fluvastatin, pravastatin, or atorvastatin. These agents may not sufficiently lower lipid levels, and therefore, a more potent agent like rosuvastatin maybe needed.

Methods: We have aimed to assess the lipid-lowering effect of rosuvastatin as compared with fluvastatin in RTR receiving everolimus. Safety was assessed as the pharmacokinetic (PK) interaction potential of a rosuvastatin/everolimus combination in RTR. A 12-hour everolimus PK investigation was performed in 12 stable RTR receiving everolimus and fluvastatin (80 mg/d). Patients were then switched to rosuvastatin (20 mg/d), and a follow-up 12/24-hour PK investigation of everolimus/rosuvastatin was performed after 1 month. All other drugs were kept unchanged.

Results: In RTR already receiving fluvastatin, switching to rosuvastatin further decreased LDL cholesterol and total cholesterol by 30.2±12.2% (P<0.01) and 18.2±9.6% (P<0.01), respectively. Everolimus AUC0-12 was not affected by concomitant rosuvastatin treatment, 80.3±21.3 μg*h/L before and 78.5±21.9 μg*h/L after, respectively (P=0.61). Mean rosuvastatin AUC0-24 was 157±61.7 ng*h/mL, approximately threefold higher than reported in the literature for nontransplants. There were no adverse events, and none of the patients had or developed proteinuria.

Conclusion: Rosuvastatin showed a superior lipid-lowering effect compared to fluvastatin in stable RTR receiving everolimus. The combination of everolimus/rosuvastatin seems to be as safe as the everolimus/fluvastatin combination.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01524601.

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: We received financial support (10 000 euro) from AstraZeneca to perform the rosuvastatin analysis. The authors have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1. Mean (± SEM) everolimus whole-blood concentration-time profiles before and after concomitant treatment with rosuvastatin

Figure 2

Mean (± SEM) rosuvastatin plasma concentration-time profiles in patients with the SLCO1B1 c.521TT variant (wild-type) (n=10) and individual rosuvastatin plasma concentration-time profiles in two patients with the SLCO1B1 c.521CC genotype.