Simvastatin is a very popular statin, and a generic. It is on all the pharmacy plans. The price point is right and prescribing is hassle free. In 2010, an estimated 2.1 million patients in the USA alone, were prescribed a product containing 80mg simvastatin. Can you imagine how many would have been on it worldwide?
The highlights of the warnings:
- Restrictions for 80-mg simvastatin
- Avoid prescribing 80-mg simvastatin because of the high risk for myopathy.
- 80-mg simvastatin is satisfactory if the patient has been on it for a year with no evidence of myopathy.
- Restrictions for intermediate- and low-dose simvastatin
- No more than 20 mg for patients taking amlodipine and ranolazine
- No more than 10 mg for patients on amiodarone, verapamil, and diltiazem
- Restrictions for simvastatin at any dose
- The FDA has mandated drug-labeling changes warning that simvastatin is contraindicated in patients on gemfibrozil, certain antifungal medications (itraconazole, ketoconazole, posaconazole), certain antibiotics (erythromycin, clarithromycin, telithromycin) as well as HIV protease inhibitors, nefazodone, cyclosporine, and danazol.
So why didn't the FDA act sooner? That's not clear, but the word is out.
Simvastatin problems are public property. Patients know about them and depend on doctors to clear up their medication regimens. Not all statins are created equal and the least expensive drug may not necessarily be the best for your patient.
References:
- de Lemos JA, Blazing MA, Wiviott SD, et al; A to Z Investigators. Early intensive vs a delayed conservative simvastatin strategy in patients with acute coronary syndromes: phase Z of the A to Z trial. JAMA. 2004; 292:1307-1316.
- Study of the Effectiveness of Additional Reductions in Cholesterol and Homocysteine (SEARCH) Collaborative Group, Armitage J, Bowman L, Wallendszus K, et al. Intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol with 80 mg versus 20 mg simvastatin daily in 12,064 survivors of myocardial infarction: a double-blind randomised trial. Lancet. 2010; 376:1658-1669.
- British Medical Journal. BMJ 2011; 343:d8014
No comments:
Post a Comment
Got something to say? We appreciate your comments: