MedPath

Compare the Efficacy of Rosuvastatin to Atorvastatin in High Risk Patients With Hypercholesterolemia

Phase 3
Completed
Conditions
Hypercholesterolemia
Interventions
Registration Number
NCT00683618
Lead Sponsor
AstraZeneca
Brief Summary

This trial is to compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of Rosuvastatin with Atorvastatin by assessing the change of LDL-C in patients with hypercholesterolemia and history of coronary heart disease (CHD) or risk equivalent, or a 10 year CHD risk of no less than 10%, following 6-week treatment and a possible 6 week extension treatment.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
934
Inclusion Criteria
  • Treated for or diagnosed hypercholesterolemia or have had a high risk with hypercholesterolemia
  • LDL-C between 3.36mmol/L and 6.5 mmol/L if not treated with statin or between 2.6mmol/L and 4.14 mmol/L
  • Fasting triglyceride less than 4.52mmol/L
Exclusion Criteria
  • History of statin induced myopathy
  • Unstable or uncontrolled cardiovascular diseases
  • Familial dysbetalipoproteinemia

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
1RosuvastatinRosuvastatin 5mg qd
2RosuvastatinRosuvastatin 10mg qd
3AtorvastatinAtorvastatin 10mg qd
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Percentage Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Concentration After 6 Weeks of Treatment Comparing Rosuvastatin 5mg With Atorvastatin 10mgbaseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a two-sided significance level of 0.025 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Concentration After 6 Weeks of Treatment Comparing Rosuvastatin 10mg With Atorvastatin 10mgbaseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.025 on ITT population.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Percentage Change From Baseline in High Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (HDL-C) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol (TC ) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Triglycerides (TG) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Non High Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (nonHDL-C) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein B (ApoB) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein A-I (ApoA-I) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Total Cholesterol/High Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (TC/HDL-C) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol/High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C/HDL-C) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Non High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol/High Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (nonHDL-C/HDL-C) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage Change From Baseline in Apolipoprotein B/Apolipoprotein A I (ApoB/ApoA-I) at Week 6baseline, 6 weeks

Analyzed with analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model with factors fitted for treatment, centre, risk factor, lipid concentration at baseline, treatment by centre and treatment by risk factor with a significance level of 0.05 on ITT population.

Percentage of Patients Achieved ATP III Guideline (2001) Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C) Goal at Week 6week 6

The percentage of patients achieved LDL-C goal is done in ITT population.

National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) guideline (2001) LDL-C goal:

Moderately high risk: 2+ risk factors (10-year risk 10%-20%): LDL-C goal \< 3.36mmol/L(130mg/dL), non-HDL-C goal \< 4.14mmol/L (160mg/dL) ; High risk: Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) or CHD risk equivalents (10-year risk \>20%): LDL-C goal\< 2.60mmol/L (100mg/dL), non-HDL-C goal \< 3.36mmol/L (130mg/dL)

6 weeksPercentage of Patients Achieved ATP III Guideline (2001) Non High Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (nonHDL-C) Goal at Week 6week 6

The percentage of patients achieved LDL-C goal is done in ITT population.

National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) guideline (2001) LDL-C goal:

Moderately high risk: 2+ risk factors (10-year risk 10%-20%): LDL-C goal \< 3.36mmol/L(130mg/dL); non-HDL-C goal \< 4.14mmol/L (160mg/dL) ; High risk: Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) or CHD risk equivalents (10-year risk \>20%): LDL-C goal\< 2.60mmol/L (100mg/dL),non-HDL-C goal \< 3.36mmol/L (130mg/dL)

Percentage of Patients Achieved National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel (NCEP ATP) III Guideline (2001) Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol (LDL-C) Goal After Titrationfrom week 6 to week 12

The percentage of patients achieved LDL-C goal is done in ITT population.

National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) guideline (2001) LDL-C goal:

Moderately high risk: 2+ risk factors (10-year risk 10%-20%): LDL-C goal \< 3.36mmol/L(130mg/dL), non-HDL-C goal \< 4.14mmol/L (160mg/dL) ; High risk: Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) or CHD risk equivalents (10-year risk \>20%): LDL-C goal\< 2.60mmol/L (100mg/dL), non-HDL-C goal \< 3.36mmol/L (130mg/dL)

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Research Site

🇨🇳

Tianjin, China

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath