Effect of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin treatment on paraoxonase-1 activity in men with established cardiovascular disease and a low HDL-cholesterol

S. C. Bergheanu, A. van Tol, G. M. Dallinga-Thie, A. Liem, P. H. J. Dunselman, J. G. van der Bom, J. W. Jukema

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

36 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Paraoxonase-1 (PON-1) is a high-density lipoprotein (HDL) associated enzyme involved in the protective mechanisms of HDL. Our aim was to compare the effect of treatment with rosuvastatin and atorvastatin on serum PON-1 activity. We performed a prespecified prospective study in 68 patients, part of a larger, multicentre randomized study--RADAR (Rosuvastatin and Atorvastatin in different Dosages And Reverse cholesterol transport). Patients aged 40-80 years, all men, with established cardiovascular disease and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) <1.0 mmol/L ( <40 mg/dL) entered a 6-week dietary run-in period before receiving treatment with rosuvastatin 10 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg daily for 6-weeks. Doses were increased after 6 weeks to rosuvastatin 20 mg or atorvastatin 40 mg and after 12 weeks to rosuvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg daily. Serum PON-1 activity and lipid profile were determined at baseline, 6 and 18 weeks. After 18 weeks, the rosuvastatin arm showed a significant increase of PON-1 activity (6.39 U/L, p = 0.02) whereas this was not observed in the atorvastatin arm (1.84 U/L, p = 0.77). The difference between groups did not reach significance (p = 0.11). Both rosuvastatin and atorvastatin resulted in significant (p = 0.0001) and similar increases in HDL-C after 6 weeks [0.06 mmol/L (2.32 mg/dL) vs. 0.05 mmol/L (1.93 mg/dL)] and after 18 weeks [0.10 mmol/L (3.87 mg/dL) vs. 0.10 mmol/L (3.87 mg/dL)]. Rosuvastatin treatment resulted in a significant increment of serum PON-1 activity with increasing dose while this was not observed with atorvastatin
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2235-2240
JournalCurrent medical research and opinion
Volume23
Issue number9
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2007

Cite this