Zipes Douglas P, Zvaifler Nathan J, Glassock Richard J, Gilman Sid, Muñoz Alvaro, Gogolak Victor, Gordis Leon, Dedon Peter C, Guengerich Frederick P, Wasserman Stephen I, Witztum Joseph L, Wogan Gerald N
Krannert Institute of Cardiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
MedGenMed. 2006 Jun 14;8(2):73.
Although the effectiveness of statins is well established, analyses of spontaneous adverse event reports have recently questioned the safety of rosuvastatin.
We evaluated the risks and benefits of rosuvastatin and compared it with other statins presently on the market. Information was obtained from a search of medical and scientific literature that produced 3001 entries, of which 591 publications containing particularly relevant data were identified, and from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Events Reporting System (AERS) and Spontaneous Reporting System through June 30, 2004. For the AERS data and to control for overreporting in the first postmarketing year and the effect on reporting due to the withdrawal of cerivastatin in 2001, we used the rate of a given adverse event among all adverse events as a measure of risk. We found that adverse effects of rosuvastatin in skeletal muscle, liver, and kidney function did not substantially differ in frequency from those reported for those of other statins in the market in 2004, except for the uncommon development of a mild form of presumably "tubular" proteinuria at doses of 40 mg/day or greater. In contrast, cerivastatin had significantly higher rates of myopathy and rhabdomyolysis than rosuvastatin's, but there was no additional effect on renal failure beyond that mediated through rhabdomyolysis. From our literature review, we found that rosuvastatin reduces abnormal lipids on a milligram-per-milligram comparison more than atorvastatin.
We conclude that rosuvastatin at approved doses incurs no greater risk for adverse events than other marketed statins, except for a mild form of tubular proteinuria when doses at or above the maximum recommended levels (> or = 40 mg/day) were administered. Its risk-benefit ratio is acceptable when compared with other statins on the market in 2006.
尽管他汀类药物的有效性已得到充分证实,但近期对自发不良事件报告的分析对瑞舒伐他汀的安全性提出了质疑。
我们评估了瑞舒伐他汀的风险和益处,并将其与目前市场上的其他他汀类药物进行比较。信息来源于对医学和科学文献的检索,检索得到3001条记录,其中591篇包含特别相关数据的出版物被识别出来,还来源于美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)不良事件报告系统(AERS)以及截至2004年6月30日的自发报告系统。对于AERS数据,为了控制上市后第一年的过度报告以及2001年西立伐他汀撤市对报告的影响,我们将特定不良事件在所有不良事件中的发生率作为风险衡量指标。我们发现,瑞舒伐他汀对骨骼肌、肝脏和肾功能的不良反应在频率上与2004年市场上其他他汀类药物报告的不良反应相比,并无实质性差异,除了在每日剂量40毫克或更高时会罕见地出现一种轻度的、可能为“肾小管性”蛋白尿。相比之下,西立伐他汀的肌病和横纹肌溶解发生率显著高于瑞舒伐他汀,但除了通过横纹肌溶解介导的影响外,对肾衰竭并无额外影响。通过我们的文献综述,我们发现按每毫克比较,瑞舒伐他汀降低异常血脂的效果比阿托伐他汀更好。
我们得出结论,在批准剂量下,瑞舒伐他汀引起不良事件的风险并不高于其他已上市的他汀类药物,除非在给予等于或高于最大推荐水平(≥40毫克/天)的剂量时会出现轻度肾小管性蛋白尿。与2006年市场上的其他他汀类药物相比,其风险效益比是可接受的。