Sequence 1
14 CLINICAL STUDIES Primary Hyperlipidemia in Adults Study with Atorvastatin (Study 301) Pitavastatin was compared with atorvastatin calcium tablets (referred to as atorvastatin) in a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, non-inferiority study of 817 adult patients with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia. Patients entered a 6- to 8-week wash-out/dietary lead-in period and then were randomized to a 12-week treatment with either pitavastatin or atorvastatin (Table 5). Non-inferiority of pitavastatin to a given dose of atorvastatin was considered to be demonstrated if the lower bound of the 95% CI for the mean treatment difference was greater than -6% for the mean percent change in LDL-C. Lipid results are shown in Table 5. For the percent change from baseline to endpoint in LDL-C, pitavastatin was non-inferior to atorvastatin for the two pairwise comparisons: Pitavastatin 2 mg vs. atorvastatin 10 mg and pitavastatin 4 mg vs. atorvastatin 20 mg. Mean treatment differences (95% CI) were 0% (-3%, 3%) and 1% (-2%, 4%), respectively. Table 5. Lipid Response by Dose of Pitavastatin and Atorvastatin in Adult Patients with Primary Hyperlipidemia or Mixed Dyslipidemia in Study 301 (Mean % Change from Baseline at Week 12) Treatment N LDL-C Apo-B TC TG HDL-C non-HDL-C Pitavastatin 2 mg daily 315 -38 -30 -28 -14 4 -35 Pitavastatin 4 mg daily 298 -45 -35 -32 -19 5 -41 Atorvastatin 10 mg daily 102 -38 -29 -28 -18 3 -35 Atorvastatin 20 mg daily 102 -44 -36 -33 -22 2 -41 Study with Simvastatin (Study 302) Pitavastatin was compared with simvastatin tablets (referred to as simvastatin) in a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, non-inferiority study of 843 adult patients with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia. Patients entered a 6- to 8-week wash-out/dietary lead-in period and then were randomized to a 12 week treatment with either pitavastatin or simvastatin (Table 6). Non-inferiority of pitavastatin to a given dose of simvastatin was considered to be demonstrated if the lower bound of the 95% CI for the mean treatment difference was greater than -6% for the mean percent change in LDL-C. Lipid results are shown in Table 6. For the percent change from baseline to endpoint in LDL-C, pitavastatin was non-inferior to simvastatin for the two pairwise comparisons: Pitavastatin 2 mg vs. simvastatin 20 mg and pitavastatin 4 mg vs. simvastatin 40 mg. Mean treatment differences (95% CI) were 4% (1%, 7%) and 1% (-2%, 4%), respectively. Table 6. Lipid Response by Dose of Pitavastatin and Simvastatin in Adult Patients with Primary Hyperlipidemia or Mixed Dyslipidemia in Study 302 (Mean % Change from Baseline at Week 12) Treatment N LDL-C Apo-B TC TG HDL-C non-HDL-C Pitavastatin 2 mg daily 307 -39 -30 -28 -16 6 -36 Pitavastatin 4 mg daily 319 -44 -35 -32 -17 6 -41 Simvastatin 20 mg daily 107 -35 -27 -25 -16 6 -32 Simvastatin 40 mg daily 110 -43 -34 -31 -16 7 -39 Study with Pravastatin in Geriatric Patients (Study 306) Pitavastatin was compared with pravastatin sodium tablets (referred to as pravastatin) in a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, active-controlled non-inferiority study of 942 geriatric patients (≥65 years) with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia. Patients entered a 6- to 8-week wash-out/dietary lead-in period, and then were randomized to a once daily dose of pitavastatin or pravastatin for 12 weeks (Table 7). Non-inferiority of pitavastatin to a given dose of pravastatin was assumed if the lower bound of the 95% CI for the treatment difference was greater than -6% for the mean percent change in LDL-C. Lipid results are shown in Table 7. Pitavastatin significantly reduced LDL-C compared to pravastatin as demonstrated by the following pairwise dose comparisons: Pitavastatin 1 mg vs. pravastatin 10 mg, pitavastatin 2 mg vs. pravastatin 20 mg and pitavastatin 4 mg vs. pravastatin 40 mg. Mean treatment differences (95% CI) were 9% (6%, 12%), 10% (7%, 13%) and 10% (7%, 13% ), respectively. Table 7. Lipid Response by Dose of Pitavastatin and Pravastatin in Geriatric Patients with Primary Hyperlipidemia or Mixed Dyslipidemia in Study 306 (Mean % Change from Baseline at Week 12) Treatment N LDL-C Apo-B TC TG HDL-C non-HDL-C Pitavastatin 1 mg daily 207 -31 -25 -22 -13 1 -29 Pitavastatin 2 mg daily 224 -39 -31 -27 -15 2 -36 Pitavastatin 4 mg daily 210 -44 -37 -31 -22 4 -41 Pravastatin 10 mg daily 103 -22 -17 -15 -5 0 -20 Pravastatin 20 mg daily 96 -29 -22 -21 -11 -1 -27 Pravastatin 40 mg daily 102 -34 -28 -24 -15 1 -32 Study with Simvastatin in Patients with ≥2 Risk Factors for Coronary Heart Disease (Study 304) Pitavastatin was compared with simvastatin tablets (referred to as simvastatin) in a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, non-inferiority study of 351 adult patients with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia with ≥2 risk factors for coronary heart disease. After a 6- to 8-week wash-out/dietary lead-in period, patients were randomized to a 12-week treatment with either pitavastatin or simvastatin (Table 8). Non-inferiority of pitavastatin to simvastatin was considered to be demonstrated if the lower bound of the 95% CI for the mean treatment difference was greater than -6% for the mean percent change in LDL-C. Lipid results are shown in Table 8. Pitavastatin 4 mg was non-inferior to simvastatin 40 mg for percent change from baseline to endpoint in LDL-C. The mean treatment difference (95% CI) was 0% (-2%, 3%). Table 8. Lipid Response by Dose of Pitavastatin and Simvastatin in Adult Patients with Primary Hyperlipidemia or Mixed Dyslipidemia with ≥2 Risk Factors for Coronary Heart Disease in Study 304 (Mean % Change from Baseline at Week 12) Treatment N LDL-C Apo-B TC TG HDL-C non-HDL-C Pitavastatin 4 mg daily 233 -44 -34 -31 -20 7 -40 Simvastatin 40 mg daily 118 -44 -34 -31 -15 5 -39 Study with Atorvastatin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (Study 305) Pitavastatin was compared with atorvastatin calcium tablets (referred to as atorvastatin) in a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group, active-controlled, non-inferiority study of 410 adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mixed dyslipidemia. Patients entered a 6- to 8-week washout/dietary lead-in period and were randomized to a once daily dose of pitavastatin or atorvastatin for 12 weeks. Non-inferiority of pitavastatin was considered to be demonstrated if the lower bound of the 95% CI for the mean treatment difference was greater than -6% for the mean percent change in LDL-C. Lipid results are shown in Table 9. The treatment difference (95% CI) for LDL-C percent change from baseline was -2% (-6.2%, 1.5%). The two treatment groups were not statistically different on LDL-C. However, the lower limit of the CI was -6.2%, slightly exceeding the -6% non-inferiority limit. The study failed to demonstrate that pitavastatin was not significantly different than atorvastatin in lowering LDL-C in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and mixed dyslipidemia. Table 9. Lipid Response by Dose of Pitavastatin and Atorvastatin in Adult Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Mixed Dyslipidemia in Study 305 (Mean % Change from Baseline at Week 12) Treatment N LDL-C Apo-B TC TG HDL-C non-HDL-C Pitavastatin 4 mg daily 274 -41 -32 -28 -20 7 -36 Atorvastatin 20 mg daily 136 -43 -34 -32 -27 8 -40 The treatment differences in efficacy in LDL-C change from baseline between pitavastatin and active controls (i.e., atorvastatin, simvastatin, or pravastatin) in the in the active-controlled studies described above are summarized in Figure 1. Figure 1. Treatment Difference in Adjusted Mean Percent Change in LDL-C between Pitavastatin and the Comparator (Atorvastatin, Simvastatin, or Pravastatin) NL=non-inferiority limit. HeFH in Pediatric Patients In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week trial, 82 pediatric patients (36 boys and 46 girls), 8 to 16 years of age with genetically confirmed HeFH, fasting low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) ≥190 mg/dL or LDL-C ≥160 mg/dL with an additional cardiovascular risk factor (male gender, a family history of premature CV disease, presence of low HDL (<45 mg/dL) or high TG (>150 mg/dL), presence of high lipoprotein (a) (>75 nmol/L), presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus or presence of hypertension) were randomized to pitavastatin 1 mg, 2 mg, and 4 mg. Mean LDL-C at baseline was 235 mg/dL (range 160.5 mg/dL to 441 mg/dL). Approximately 39% of patients were Tanner Stage 1 at baseline. Pitavastatin significantly reduced plasma LDL-C, non-HDL-C, TC, and Apo-B compared to placebo. The reductions in LDL-C, Apo-B, TC, and non-HDL-C were dose dependent. There was no statistically significant improvement in HDL-C or TG at any pitavastatin dose. See the lipid results in Table 10. Table 10. Lipid Response in Pediatric Patients with HeFH (Mean % Change from Baseline at Week 12) Treatment N LDL-C Apo-B TC TG *# HDL-C * non-HDL-C Placebo 19 -1 -3 -1 -3 -1 -1 Pitavastatin 1 mg daily 20 -21 -20 -16 -14 7 -21 Pitavastatin 2 mg daily 24 -30 -25 -25 -15 -3 -29 Pitavastatin 4 mg daily 19 -38 -28 -30 5 -2 -36 *Difference from placebo not statistically significant # Median Percent Change from Baseline at Week 12 pitavastatinfigure1