Top News and Analysis for R&D and Executive Leaders

 

Week of 7.2.08

tbar.gif


Best Practices
Click here to
submit entries

Neil W Gibson of OSI Pharmaceuticals

Jeffrey Settleman Harvard Medical School and MGH Cancer Center

David Bailey of Chemoventures

N Claude Cohen of Synergix

-View All Webcasts

 

 

 
     

 

 

Exclusive Analysis

Making the Most of Statins: Risks and Benefits of Bringing Blockbusters into New Arenas
by John Ansell, Director, John Ansell Consultancy

Nov. 14, 2005--Since the late 1980s, statins have made their mark on the pharmaceutical market in unprecedented terms: According to IMS, the world's two top-selling drugs are both statins -- Lipitor (atorvastatin, Pfizer, worth $12.0 billion in 2004) and Zocor (simvastatin, Merck & Co., $5.9 billion in 2004). Med Ad News reported in May 2005 that among the top 200 best-selling global drugs for 2004, these lipid-lowering agents contributed just under $25 billion, or one-fifth of the total for the entire list. Statins thus form the most important subclass of drugs ever sold.

Some of the air will start seeping out of this massive revenue balloon over the next couple of years, as the impact of patent expiry grows. This would mark the beginning of the end of the statin fairy tale, except that some developers and other interested parties, including clinicians, have been looking into new indications for these remarkable medicines.

Most of the indications being explored stay close to the drugs' original purpose.  Pfizer's Lipitor, for example, was most recently approved for stroke and heart attack prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes or other high risk factors (see Peck, MedPage Today, 2005). A recently published trial has also shown that statins reduce the risk of stroke and death after carotid artery surgery (see McGirt, J of Vascular Surgery, 2005).  In addition, effects of statins are being examined in several potential new indications well outside the cardiovascular arena, with intriguing results in at least a couple of cases.  For example, a recent report found statin use was associated with a 47% relative reduction in the risk of colorectal cancer (see Poynter, N Engl J Med, 2005).

With enticing results such as these coming out, it may seem sensible to test these drugs in new therapeutic territories.  But developers must always keep in mind that extending an established blockbuster into an entirely new area can also put existing sales at risk. 

Cardiovascular Beginnings

Statins made their debut as a breakthrough treatment for hypercholesterolemia and were initially approved for lowering risk of heart attack in patients who had already experienced such an event. As understanding of the cardiovascular system grew, the applications for statins also expanded – into coronary heart disease and into occlusive arterial disease including hemorrhagic stroke or transient ischemic attacks. With progress in the understanding of the interrelatedness of different diseases, statins have also become recognized over the past few years for the prevention of myocardial infarction in metabolic syndrome patients.

No doubt this avid mining of the cardiovascular field is partly because of the tremendous scope of such conditions.  It also helps that other types of cardiovascular drugs, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, have already followed a similar development path.  It was therefore reasonable to expect that diabetic heart disease might respond to a drug already being used for that same problem in a general population. This strategy of staying close to the "home" indication has worked superbly for the statin companies, giving them unprecedented success entirely within cardiovascular disease.

As research on statins has progressed, it has also become clear that these agents have other effects besides simply lowering blood levels of the "bad" low-density lipoproteins (LDLs).  Statins also work through various, still poorly understood, so-called "pleiotropic" effects – even in cardiovascular disease.  As a result, if statins show promise in a novel indication, it could be because of their lipid-lowering properties or could be due to one or more pleiotropic effects. 

Statins Unleashed

Since these drugs first entered clinical development, people have been attempting to apply them in a variety of new disorders. For example, the first statin, Mevacor (lovastatin), launched by Merck & Co. in 1987, was also investigated as a gallstone therapy, apparently without success.  Since then, statins have been investigated in a wide range of other indications.  Some of the most important of these indications are discussed below.

Dementia.  Lipitor also made an initial foray outside the cardiovascular field when it was tested in dementia. The fundamental mechanism postulated for Lipitor's use in this condition still relates to the drug's best studied effect – lowering levels of LDL in the blood (see Sparks, Int Psychogeriatr, 2003).  In 2001, after some preliminary reports claiming statins prevented dementia, a prospective study of Lipitor's efficacy in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) was initiated. Because the exact mechanism of AD has been widely debated for years, many people were interested to know whether LDL is a key factor in this incurable and increasingly common condition.

Preliminary results were expected from these studies in 2003 but have not been forthcoming. There may simply be nothing good to say about them. The recent reports that have been published on this topic actually greatly undermine optimism about the use of statins for AD.

A study from Sun Health Research Institute in Arizona did find that Lipitor showed some clinical benefit in mild-to-moderate AD (see Sparks, Arch Neurology, 2005.) The authors of this study suggested the drug could become established as an effective AD therapy if their findings were substantiated by a much larger multicenter trial.  However, at least two other trials have failed to show any such benefit. In a large prospective trial in the over-65 age-group, statin use was not associated with a decreased risk of dementia.  Indeed, former statin use was found to be associated with an elevated risk of this condition (see Rea, Arch Neurology, 2005). The 2005 Cache County study, meanwhile, found no association between statin use and the subsequent onset of dementia (see Zandi, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 2005).

In light of these recent results, pharmaceutical companies seem to have lost interest in pursuing statins for use in dementia. Indeed, the rather unexpected reversal of fortune for statins in AD may have made companies much more hesitant to get involved in other noncardiovascular indications where similar, preliminary reports from clinicians have stirred interest.

Osteoporosis.  A considerable amount of research has been conducted on statins in osteoporosis, with conflicting results. One conclusion seems to be that statins do not reduce the risk of fracture (see Waldman, Drugs, 2003).

Immunosuppression in Transplantation.  Holdaas (Minerva Urol Nephrol, 2003) found that although in vitro studies provided a theoretical basis for the use of statins as immunosuppressive agents, more-recent placebo-controlled clinical studies failed to confirm the initial positive results.

Anti-Infective Activity.  Initial results of studies into statins' effects in infection seem to suggest reason for further investigation.  The following trials have been particularly encouraging:

  • In a retrospective review, Liappis and colleagues (Clin Infect Dis, 2001) concluded that statins have potential for use in bacteremic infections.
  • A recent Israeli trial found that prior statin therapy dramatically reduced the incidence of severe sepsis (from 19% to 2.4%) in patients with acute bacterial infections.  According to the authors, these data support initiation of prospective controlled trials (see Almog, Circulation, 2004).
  • In another recent report, patients hospitalized because of pneumonia who were taking statins were found to be 2.8 times less likely to die from pneumonia than patients not taking these agents (see Mortensen, Respir Res, 2005).

Cancer.  Outside of cardiovascular disease, by far the greatest amount of research on statins has involved cancer.  Work on statins in this area goes back to the early 1990s, far longer than for most other noncardiovascular areas, and involves multiple tumor types (see Table 1).  Only a small percentage of these studies have been completed, but they have produced some intriguing results (see Table 2).

Table 1: Cancers Targeted with Statins
Breast
Colon
Glioma
Leukemia
Lung
Lymphoma
Multiple myeloma
Neuroblastoma
Ovarian
Pancreatic
Renal
Sarcomas
Stomach


Table 2:  Some Results from Studies of Statin Use in Cancer

Melanoma: Current initial clinical data promising but preliminary.

Prostate: The most advanced of all cancer indications – see main text.

Liver: A small preliminary clinical trial in 2001 showed improved survival and supported potential use of statins as adjuvant therapy in advanced liver cancer.

Rectal:  A small retrospective study showed an apparent improved pathologic impact when preoperative chemoradiation was used in patients concurrently receiving therapy with statins.  

Source for Tables 1 & 2:  John Ansell Consultancy based on data from Moyad (Urol Oncol, 2004 and 2005).

 

With the recent exception of prostate cancer, none of these investigations has yet reached the prospective trial stage. Moreover, in some cases, several years have passed since the preliminary studies or epidemiologic observations were published and any news concerning these investigations.  This development suggests that either the study results were not sufficiently promising or they were outright negative.

Research on statin use in prostate cancer is advancing though.  Just this year, cancer epidemiologist Elizabeth Platz reported on a long-term prospective study in which the number of advanced prostate cancer cases were halved among men using statins (see Platz, AACR, 2005; and Platz, ASCO, 2005).  Although Platz characterized her group's results as promising, she considered it too early to recommend that men at high risk of prostate cancer start taking statins. Further large studies, she cautioned, would first be needed to confirm these results. 

Not surprisingly, some people think this positive finding requires immediate follow-up.  Mark Moyad, a urologist from Michigan University, has argued strenuously in several papers published during the past couple of years that a statin should be included in the next major cancer chemoprevention trial and has advanced numerous arguments in support of this assertion (see Moyad, Urol Oncol, 2004 and 2005).

Pharmaceutical companies must also consider this proposition from the commercial viewpoint, which means weighing the following factors:

  • Prostate cancer is the second most common cause of cancer deaths in the United States: 30,350 deaths are projected for 2005. The American Cancer Society estimates that the incidence of this cancer in the United States will be 232,000 in 2005, and prevalence will be more than three times this number.
  • However, tumors of the prostate are slow growing, and patients currently have a five-year survival rate in the United States of 92%. Because of this high survival rate, many patients are not actively treated, but are managed using "watchful waiting."
  • Cardiovascular disease is much more common than prostate cancer. It accounted for 1.4 million deaths in the United States in 2002, representing 38% of mortality from all causes. In men, death from cardiovascular disease is about 50 times more common than death from prostate cancer.

Even Moyad admits that less than half of all patients with prostate cancer actually die from it: One of the leading causes of death among these patients is cardiovascular disease.  Because so many patients are routinely screened for high blood pressure and cholesterol levels, a lot of men end up receiving a statin even before they are tested for prostate cancer. In light of this fact, statin developers are likely to see the prostate cancer opportunity as quite modest relative to the existing cardiovascular market. That view could be one reason they have not yet rushed to take advantage of apparently promising results in prostate cancer.

Conclusions: Which Way to Go?

From a purely commercial standpoint, the choices for statin developers seem clear.  The cardiovascular area is much bigger than any other, it is not yet fully exploited, and it will require considerable resources to fully address that area alone, without venturing into bold new therapeutic territories. 

For example, it is increasingly accepted that simply lowering "bad" cholesterol (or LDL) levels is insufficient, and doctors should be trying to raise "good" cholesterol (high-density lipoprotein [HDL]) as well.  With that goal in mind, Pfizer is devoting enormous resources to late-stage trials of Lipitor in combination with a novel cardiovascular agent – torcetrapib – a cholesterol ester transfer protein inhibitor. If the new combination works better than Lipitor alone, the older drug will get a new lease on  life in an indication where it has already been very successful.

Earlier disappointments around exploratory applications for statins are another deterrent:  Promising leads in fields such as osteoporosis and dementia did not stand up to rigorous statistical analysis. As a result, companies are probably more skeptical now when considering such theories.

One final, major consideration these companies must heed is: Don't toy with the crown jewels.  Experimenting with any drug runs the risk of uncovering effects that could put the entire franchise at risk.  Newly discovered side effects may be due to the different patient population's clinical profile.  Side effects can also appear just because a drug is being used in a new way, such as at higher doses.  Sometimes, however, such studies uncover major effects, and bring important new information to the clinic:  For example, the cardiovascular events related to the anti-arthritic Vioxx (rofecoxib, Merck & Co.) became clear after the drug was used in a colorectal cancer prevention trial (see Bresalier N Engl J Med, 2005).  But if newly detected side effects are patient group-specific, or no more than a statistical quirk, it can still take a long time to establish that. In the meantime, the original franchise is losing money. 

So, while it would be interesting to at least pursue the more promising indications (e.g., prostate cancer, colon cancer, and infectious diseases), potential disincentives do exist to discourage statin companies from pursuing this research.  For now, it may well make more sense to continue development of cardiovascular indications -- a field that still has abundant unmet needs.  This focus on the cardiovascular arena does not mean that statin companies are likely to totally ignore noncardiovascular indications. They are likely to select some such projects, favoring indications that not only look most attractive commercially but also appear to carry low risk of revealing new types of adverse reactions.  Perhaps the most adventurous companies could be those with the least to lose – including start-up companies yet to benefit commercially in the statin market.
 

References and Available Links

Almog, Y, et al.  "Prior statin therapy is associated with a decreased rate of severe sepsis." Circulation. 2004 Aug 17;110(7):880-5.

Bresalier, RS, et al.  "Cardiovascular Events Associated with Rofecoxib in a Colorectal Adenoma Chemoprevention Trial," N Engl J Med. 2005; 352(11):1092-1102.

Holdass, H, and Jardine, A.  "Acute renal allograft rejections, a role for statins?"
Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2003 Jun; 55(2):111-9.

Liappis, AP, et al. "The effect of statins on mortality in patients with bacteremia."
Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Oct 15; 33(8):1352-7.

McGirt, MJ, et al. "3-Hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors reduce the risk of perioperative stroke and mortality after carotid endarterectomy." J of Vascular Surgery. 2005; 42(5):829-36.

Mortensen, EM, et al. "The effect of prior statin use on 30-day mortality for patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia." Respir Res. 2005 Jul 25; 6:82.

Moyad, MA, and Merrick, GS. "Statins and cholesterol lowering after a cancer diagnosis: why not?"  Urol Oncol. 2005 Jan-Feb; 23(1):49-55. 

Moyad, MA. "Why a statin and/or another proven heart healthy agent should be utilized in the next major cancer chemoprevention trial: part I."  Urol Oncol. 2004 Nov-Dec; 22(6):466-71.

Moyad, MA. "Why a statin and/or another proven heart healthy agent should be utilized in the next major cancer chemoprevention trial: part II." Urol Oncol. 2004 Nov-Dec; 22(6):472-7.

Peck, P.  "Lipitor approved for stroke prevention." MedPage Today, Sept. 28, 2005.

Platz, AACR press release:

Platz, ASCO virtual presentation:

Poynter, JN, et al. "Statins and the risk of colorectal cancer." N Engl J Med. 2005; 352(21):2184-92. 

Rea, TD, et al. "Statin use and the risk of incident dementia: the Cardiovascular Health Study." Arch Neurol. 2005 Jul;62(7):1047-51.

Sparks, DL, et al. "Is cholesterol a culprit in Alzheimer's disease?" 
Int Psychogeriatr. 2003; 15 Suppl 1:153-9. 

Sparks, DL, et al.  "Atorvastatin for the treatment of mild to moderate Alzheimer disease: preliminary results," Arch Neurology. 2005; 62(5):753-7.

Waldman, A and Kritharides, L. "The pleiotropic effects of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors: their role in osteoporosis and dementia." Drugs. 2003; 63(2):139-152.

Zandi, PP, et al. "Do statins reduce risk of incident dementia and Alzheimer disease? The Cache County Study." Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Feb; 62(2):217-24.

©  Copyright 2005, Cambridge Healthtech Institute. All Rights Reserved

 

 

 


PharmaWeek
is subject to the terms and conditions of use
Please read the important legal notices and disclaimers contained in these terms and
conditions of use.


Copyright 2005  Cambridge Healthtech Institute  |  250 First Avenue  |   Suite 300   |   Needham,  MA  02494
Phone: 781-972-5400  |   Fax: 781-972-5425