METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 112 healthy men and women from 3 main ethnic group (Malay, Chinese, and Indian) who were aged 18-60 years. The participants were categorized into normal body mass index (BMI), overweight and obese groups according to WHO criteria for BMI in Asian populations (18.5 kg/m2
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed searches were conducted using the keywords 'statin, effect, and lipid profile' from database inception through March 2016. In this review, 718 articles were retrieved from the primary search. After reviewing the titles, abstracts, and full texts, we found that 59 studies met our inclusion criteria. These also included subsequent reference searches of retrieved articles.
RESULTS: CURVES study compared the effect on lipid profile between atorvastatin and other statins. This study demonstrated that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TG) were reduced more with atorvastatin compared to simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, and fluvastatin. However, simvastatin provided a greater elevation of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) compared to atorvastatin. The STELLAR trial was based on dose-to-dose comparisons between atorvastatin and rosuvastatin efficacy in reducing LDL-C. Te present study also revealed that as the doses of rosuvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin increased, HDL-C also increased, with rosuvastatin having the greatest effect. However, HDL-C levels decreased as the dose of atorvastatin increased. The DISCOVERY study involving the Asian population revealed that the percentage of patients achieving the European goals for LDL-C and TC at 12 weeks was higher in rosuvastatin group compared to atorvastatin group.
CONCLUSIONS: The effects of statins on lipid profile are dose dependent. Most studies showed that rosuvastatin has the best effect on lipid profile. Prescribing lower doses of statins in Asians seems necessary.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving community-living, healthy subjects aged between 45-90 years from the state of Selangor, Malaysia, were invited to attend a bone health check-up. Subjects with diseases known to affect bone metabolism or were on treatment for osteoporosis (OP) were excluded. Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured using dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Lateral and antero-posterior view lumbar spine x-rays were performed and VF was determined by the semi-quantitative Genant method.
RESULTS: A total of 386 subjects were studied. Asymptomatic morphometric VF were found in 44 (11.4%) subjects. T12 was the most common vertebrae to be fractured. The prevalence of VF was significantly higher in menopausal women (12.4%) compared to non-menopausal women, in those above the age of 60 (18.5%), in those of Chinese ethnicity (16.5%), in those with a low body fat percentage (17.1%) and among those with OP (27.0%). The mean (standard deviation) 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels were significantly higher in those with VF compared to those without VF, 67.64 (23.50) and 57.47 (21.71) nmol/L, respectively. However, after multiple regression analysis, age over 60 years and OP on DXA BMD measurement were the only significant associated factors for VF.
CONCLUSION: Overall, 11.4% of a selected Malaysian urban population had asymptomatic morphometric VF. Age over 60 years and OP on DXA BMD measurement, but not 25(OH)D levels, were associated with VF.
PURPOSE: We aimed to examine the role of age-dependent intervention thresholds (ITs) applied to the Fracture Risk Assessment (FRAX) tool in therapeutic decision making for osteoporosis in the Malaysian population.
METHODS: Data were collated from 1380 treatment-naïve postmenopausal women aged 40-85 years who underwent bone mineral density (BMD) measurements for clinical reasons. Age-dependent ITs, for both major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture (HF), were calculated considering a woman with a BMI of 25 kg/m2, aged between 40 and 85years, with a prior fragility fracture, sans other clinical risk factors. Those with fracture probabilities equal to or above upper assessment thresholds (UATs) were considered to have high fracture risk. Those below the lower assessment thresholds (LATs) were considered to have low fracture risk.
RESULTS: The ITs of MOF and HF ranged from 0.7 to 18% and 0.2 to 8%, between 40 and 85years. The LATs of MOF ranged from 0.3 to 11%, while those of HF ranged from 0.1 to 5.2%. The UATs of MOF and HF were 0.8 to 21.6% and 0.2 to 9.6%, respectively. In this study, 24.8% women were in the high-risk category while 30.4% were in the low-risk category. Of the 44.8% (n=618) in the intermediate risk group, after recalculation of fracture risk with BMD input, 38.3% (237/618) were above the ITs while the rest (n=381, 61.7%) were below the ITs. Judged by the Youden Index, 11.5% MOF probability which was associated with a sensitivity of 0.62 and specificity of 0.83 and 4.0% HF probability associated with a sensitivity of 0.63 and a specificity 0.82 were found to be the most appropriate fixed ITs in this analysis.
CONCLUSION: Less than half of the study population (44.8%) required BMD for osteoporosis management when age-specific assessment thresholds were applied. Therefore, in more than half, therapeutic decisions can be made without BMD based on these assessment thresholds.