Search

Introduction: Stroke is a leading cause of mortality and disability. Policosanol has been effective in brain ischemia models. The aim of this study is to investigate whether policosanol, added to aspirin therapy within 30 days of stroke onset, is better than placebo + aspirine for the long-term recovery of non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke subjects., Patients and Methods: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eighty patients (mean age: 69 years) within 30 days of onset, with a modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) 2 to 4, were included. They were randomized in two groups (policosanol + aspirine or placebo + aspirine) for 12 months., Results: Policosanol + aspirine decreased significantly mean mRS from the first interim check-up (1.5 months). The treatment even improved after long-term therapy. More policosanol + aspirin (87.5%) than placebo + aspirine (0%) patients achieved mRSs <= 1. Policosanol + aspirine increased significantly Barthel Index, lowered LDL-cholesterol and increased HDL-cholesterol versus placebo + aspirin., Conclusions: Long-term (12 months) administration of policosanol + aspirin given after suffering non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke was shown to be better than placebo + aspirin in improving functional outcomes when used among patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke of moderate severity.

Background/aims: Osteoarthritis (OA), the commonest joint disorder, is a leading cause of disability. Symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA (SYSADOA), particularly glucosamine plus chondroitin sulphate (GS/CS), are effective for symptom relief, protect joint cartilage and delay OA progression, with a good safety profile. D-002, a mixture of beeswax alcohols that inhibits both cyclooxygenase and 5-lipoxygenase activities, has been effective in experimental and clinical OA studies, showing also a chondroprotective effect., Objectives: To compare the effects of D-002 and GS/SC administered for 12 weeks on OA symptoms., Methods: Participants were randomized to GS/CS (375/300 mg) or 50 mg D-002 once daily for 12 weeks. Symptoms were assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Individual Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Visual Analogy Scale (VAS) scores. The primary outcome was the reduction of the total WOMAC score. Secondary outcomes included WOMAC pain, stiffness and function scores, VAS score and rescue medication consumption., Results: Of 60 randomized patients, 59 completed the study. D-002 and GS/SC reduced significantly total WOMAC score (72.1% and 78.5%, respectively), and pain, joint stiffness and physical function scores versus baseline. VAS scores decreased significantly with D-002 (76.6%) and GS/SC (76.8%). The reductions, significant from the second week, were enhanced over the trial. Rescue medications were consumed by 3/30 D-002 and 4/30 GS/SC patients. No differences between groups were found. Treatments were well tolerated., Conclusions: D-002 (50 mg/day) administered for 12 weeks was safe and comparable to GS/SC for alleviating OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, and functional limitation) (RPCEC00000180).

Context • Nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory drugs effectively relieve osteoarthritis (OA) symptoms but also induce adverse effects (AEs) that limit their long-term use, which drives a search for safer treatments. D-002, a mixture of beeswax alcohols, and D-003, a mixture of sugarcane wax acids, have been effective in experimental and clinical studies for patients with OA. Objective • The study intended to investigate the effects on OA symptoms of a combined therapy using D-002 and D-003 (D-002/D-003), which were administered for 6 wk. Design • The study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Setting • The study was conducted at the Surgical Medical Research Center in Havana, Cuba. Participants • Participants were patients with mild-to-moderate OA. Intervention • Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups-(1) a control group, which received a placebo; (2) the D-002 group (intervention group), which received 50 mg/d of D-002; (3) the D-003 group (intervention group), which received 10 mg/d of D-003; or (4) the D-002/D-003 group (intervention group), which received a combined therapy of 50 mg/d of D-002 plus 10 mg/d of D-003. The control group received tablets that were indistinguishable in appearance from the D-002 and D-003 tablets and had a similar composition, except that the active ingredients were replaced by lactose. The groups took the medications once per day for 6 wk. Outcome Measures • Symptoms were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Individual Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The primary outcome was the reduction in the total WOMAC score. The subscale scores on the WOMAC for pain, stiffness, and physical function, the VAS scores, and the use of rescue medications were secondary outcomes. Results • Of the 120 enrolled participants, 116 completed the study. The treatments with D-002, D-003, and D-002/D-003 reduced the mean total WOMAC scores significantly from baseline to postintervention, by 75.1%, 72.8%, and 91.2%, respectively. Compared with the placebo, the treatments decreased the mean WOMAC scores for pain, joint stiffness, and physical function significantly. The VAS scores significantly decreased, showing a 71.4%, a 66.9%, and an 84.7% reduction for the D-002, D-003, and D-002/D-003 groups, respectively. All the reductions were significant from the first week and were enhanced during the trial. The D-002/D-003 treatment was more effective in improving all of the scores than either monotherapy. With respect to rescue medications, 3/30, 2/30, and 2/30 used the medications in the D-002, D-003, and D-002/D-003 groups, respectively, vs 17/30 in the control group. The treatments were well tolerated. Conclusions • Administered for 6 wk, 50 mg/d of D-002 and 10 mg/d of D-003 ameliorated OA symptoms, but the combined therapy, D-002/D-003, was more effective than either monotherapy. All treatments were well tolerated.

Background/aims: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs relieve osteoarthritis (OA) symptoms but cause adverse effects. D-002, a mixture of beeswax alcohols, is effective against experimental OA. A pilot study found that D-002 (50 mg/day) for 8 weeks improves OA symptoms. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of D-002 (50 to 100 mg/day) administered for 6 weeks on OA symptoms., Methods: Patients with OA symptoms were double-blindly randomized to D-002 (50 mg) or placebo for 6 weeks. Symptoms were assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Individual Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Patients without symptom improvement at week 3 were titrated to two daily tablets. The primary outcome was the total WOMAC score. WOMAC pain, joint stiffness and physical function scores, VAS score, and use of rescue medications were secondary outcomes., Results: All randomized patients (n = 60) completed the study, and 23 experienced dose titration (two in the D-002 and 21 in the placebo groups). At study completion, D-002 reduced total WOMAC (65.4%), pain (54.9%), joint stiffness (76.8%), and physical function (66.9%) WOMAC scores, and the VAS score (46.8%) versus placebo. These reductions were significant beginning in the second week, and became enhanced during the trial. The use of rescue medication by the D-002 (6/30) group was lower than that in the placebo (17/30) group. The treatment was well tolerated. Seven patients (two in the D-002 and five in the placebo group) reported adverse events., Conclusions: These results indicate that D-002 (50 to 100 mg/day) for 6 weeks ameliorated arthritic symptoms and was well tolerated.

Background/aims: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is intimately related to insulin resistance and ranges from a benign course to liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. NAFLD management mainly involves dietary modification and weight loss. Although no fully successful pharmacological intervention is available, alternative therapies to treat NAFLD have shown promising results. Experimental studies have shown that D-002, a mixture of beeswax alcohols with antioxidant effects, is hepatoprotective. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of D-002 in patients with NALFD., Methods: Fifty patients with NAFLD were randomized to receive a placebo or D-002 (100 mg/day) for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was a significant ultrasonography-detected reduction of liver fat infiltration versus a placebo. Secondary endpoints were decreases in the homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) index, insulin levels, serum liver enzymes, increases in plasma total antioxidant status (TAS) and improved clinical symptoms versus the placebo recipients., Results: At randomization, all indicators were comparable in both groups. At study completion, seven (28.0%) D-002-patients, but none of the placebo recipients, exhibited a normal liver echo pattern on ultrasonography (p < 0.01). Also, D-002 significantly reduced (p < 0.01 vs. baseline and placebo) the HOMA index and insulin levels and increased the TAS, but did not affect other parameters. The proportion of D-002-patients (12/25, 48.0%) showing symptom improvement was higher (p < 0.001) than that of the placebo group (1/25, 4.0%). The treatment was safe and well tolerated. Three patients in each group withdrew from the study., Conclusions: D-002 (100 mg/day) improved ultrasonographic findings, indicators of insulin resistance, plasma TAS and clinical evolution on NAFLD patients. Further studies, however, are needed to confirm these results.

Background: Policosanol is a mixture of higher aliphatic primary alcohols purified from sugar-cane wax. The mixture has cholesterol-lowering efficacy, its specific effects being to reduce serum total (TC) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). The effects of policosanol on triglycerides (TG) are modest and inconsistent. Omega-3 fatty acids (FA) from fish oil protect against coronary disease, mainly through antiarrhythmic and antiplatelet effects. Omega-3 FA also have lipid-modifying effects, mostly relating to TG reduction. Thus, potential benefits could be expected from combined therapy with omega-3 FA and policosanol., Objective: To investigate whether combined therapy with omega-3 FA + policosanol offers benefits compared with omega-3 FA + placebo with respect to the lipid profile of patients with type II hypercholesterolaemia., Methods: This randomised, double-blind study was conducted in 90 patients with type II hypercholesterolaemia. After 5 weeks on a cholesterol-lowering diet, patients were randomised to omega-3 FA + placebo, omega-3 FA + policosanol 5 mg/day or omega-3 FA + policosanol 10 mg/day for 8 weeks. Omega-3 FA was supplied as 1g capsules (two per day); placebo and policosanol were provided in tablet form. Physical signs and laboratory markers were assessed at baseline and after 4 and 8 weeks on therapy. Drug compliance and adverse experiences (AEs) were assessed at weeks 4 and 8. The primary efficacy variable was LDL-C reduction; other lipid profile markers were secondary variables., Results: After 8 weeks, omega-3 FA + policosanol 5 and 10 mg/day, but not omega-3 FA + placebo, significantly reduced LDL-C by 21.1% and 24.4%, respectively (both p < 0.0001). Omega-3 FA + policosanol 5 mg/day also significantly lowered TC (12.7%; p < 0.01) and TG (13.6%; p < 0.05), and significantly increased HDL-C (+14.4%; p < 0.001). Omega-3 FA + policosanol 10 mg/day significantly decreased TC (15.3%; p < 0.001) and TG (14.7%; p < 0.01), and significantly increased HDL-C (+15.5%; p < 0.0001). Omega-3 FA + placebo significantly reduced TG (14.2%; p < 0.05) but had no significant effect on other lipid profile variables. The proportion of randomised patients in the omega-3 FA + policosanol 5 or 10 mg/day groups that achieved LDL-C targets or reductions 15% was significantly greater than in the omega-3 FA + placebo group (p < 0.001). Combined therapy with omega-3 FA + policosanol 5 or 10 mg/day resulted in significantly greater changes in LDL-C, TC and HDL-C than treatment with omega-3 FA + placebo, but did not modify the TG response compared with the omega-3 FA + placebo group. Four patients (two in the omega-3 FA + placebo group and two in the omega-3 FA + policosanol 10 mg/day group) withdrew from the study; none of these withdrawals was due to AEs. Two patients reported mild AEs, namely nausea/headache (one in the omega-3 FA + placebo group) and heartburn (one in the omega-3 FA + policosanol 5 mg/day group)., Conclusions: Policosanol 5 or 10 mg/day administered concomitantly with omega-3 FA 1 g/day improved LDL-C, TC and HDL-C, maintained the reduction in TG attributable to omega-3 FA monotherapy, and was well tolerated. Treatment with omega-3 FA + policosanol could be useful for regulating lipid profile in patients with type II hypercholesterolaemia, but further studies involving larger sample sizes are needed before definitive conclusions can be drawn.

The main goal of hypercholesterolemia management for coronary prevention is to reduce serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. D-003 is a mixture of high molecular weight aliphatic acids purified from sugarcane wax, while policosanol is a cholesterol-lowering drug purified from the same source, consisting in a mixture of higher aliphatic alcohols. No previous comparative study of both drugs in humans has been reported. This randomized, double-blind study compares the efficacy and tolerability of D-003 and policosanol (5 and 10 mg/day) in patients with type II hypercholesterolemia. After a baseline period, 100 patients were randomized to D-003 or policosanol both at 5 mg/day and 10 mg/day, for 8 weeks. D-003 and policosanol 5 mg/day reduced (p < 0.0001) LDL-C by 26.9% and 20.9%, respectively. These reductions increased with 10 mg/day (35.1% for D-003, 25.1% for policosanol. The reductions of LDL-C achieved with D-003 5 mg/day and 10 mg/day were greater (p < 0.05 and p < 0.001, respectively) than with policosanol. The frequency of patients treated with D-003 (5 mg/day) reaching LDL-C reductions > or = 15% (22/25, 88%) was greater (p < 0.01) than with policosanol (5 mg/day) (19/25, 76%), and the same was true for D-003 10 mg/day (25/25, 100%) and policosanol (22/25, 88%; p < 0.01). D-003 and policosanol (5 mg/day) also lowered (p < 0.001) total cholesterol (TC) (16.2% and 13.5%, respectively), and increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) by 15.3% (D-003) and 6.7% (policosanol). At 10 mg/day, D-003 and policosanol reduced (p < 0.001) TC (21.3% and 16.0%, respectively), while HDL-C was increased by 17.3% and 9.8%, respectively, D-003 being more effective than policosanol. Treatments did not affect triglycerides. Both drugs were well tolerated, with D-003 tolerated as well as policosanol. Three patients discontinued the study, none due to adverse events (AEs). Seven patients (three from the D-003 group and four from the policosanol group) experienced mild AEs. In conclusion, D-003 (5 and 10 mg/day) administered to patients with type II hypercholesterolemia was more effective than policosanol in lowering LDL-C and TC, and in increasing HDL-C. D-003 could be useful for treating type II hypercholesterolemia, but this subject deserves further clinical research.

Policosanol is a cholesterol-lowering drug with concomitant antiplatelet effects. It is safe and well tolerated, even in populations with high consumption of concomitant drugs. These data suggest that adverse events (AE) due to drug-to-drug interactions (DDI) with policosanol are not relevant. Experimental data indicate that potential DDI between policosanol and drugs metabolized through the cytochrome P450 hepatic system are not expected, but pharmacodynamic DDI cannot be excluded. Several clinical studies have shown that policosanol decreased arterial pressure compared with placebo, and a pharmacological interaction with beta-blockers was experimentally proven. Therefore, clinical DDI between policosanol and beta-blockers can be expected. This study investigated whether policosanol reinforces the antihypertensive effects of beta-blockers and/or whether this combination impairs some safety indicators or induces specific AE in older patients. After 5 weeks on a diet-only baseline period, 205 older hypercholesterolemic patients taking beta-blockers were randomized to policosanol 5 mg/day or placebo for 3 years. After 1 year on therapy, policosanol significantly reduced (p < 0.00001 versus placebo) low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) (20.9%), total cholesterol (TC) (19.3%) and triglycerides (TG) (25.7%), whereas it increased (p < 0.01 and p < 0.001 versus placebo) high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) levels (4.1%). Treatment effects did not to wear off during the 3-year follow-up. At study completion, policosanol lowered (p < 0.00001 versus placebo) LDL-C (34.3%), TC (23.2%) and TG (21.2%) and raised (p < 0.00001 versus placebo) HDL-C (12.3%). Thirty-one patients (15.1%) discontinued the study, 22 in the placebo group (20.6%) and nine in the policosanol group (9.2%). Of these, 20 patients (16 in the placebo group and four in the policosanol group) withdrew from the study due to AE. The frequency of serious adverse events (SAE), mostly vascular, in policosanol patients (3/98, 3.1%) was lower than in the placebo group (15/107, 14.0%). No impairment of safety indicators was observed. Nevertheless, reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure were observed in policosanol patients compared with those in the placebo group. The frequency of policosanol patients reporting mild or moderate AE (18/98, 18.4%) was also lower than in the placebo group (30/107, 28.0%). In conclusion, policosanol was well tolerated in elderly patients taking beta-block- ers and did not increase AE. Additional reduction of blood pressure and a lower frequency of SAE were observed in policosanol patients compared with those taking placebo. The cholesterol-lowering efficacy of policosanol was that expected. These results provide support that policosanol therapy added to hypercholesterolemic elderly individuals taking beta-blockers could provide additional benefits in lowering blood pressure; SAE were not more frequent in the policosanol group than in the placebo group and there was no increase in AE.

Background: Hypercholesterolaemia is a risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD). Clinical studies have shown that lowering elevated serum total cholesterol (TC) levels, and particularly low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) levels, reduces the frequency of coronary morbidity and deaths, whereas high serum levels of high density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) protect against CHD. Policosanol is a cholesterol-lowering drug purified from sugar cane wax with a therapeutic dosage range from 5-20 mg/day. Atorvastatin is an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor which across its dosage range (10-80 mg/day) has shown significantly greater lipid-lowering effects than all previously marketed statins., Objective: This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of policosanol with atorvastatin in older patients with type II hypercholesterolaemia., Patients and Methods: This randomised, single-blind, parallel-group study was conducted in older patients (60-80 years) with type II hypercholesterolaemia. After 4 weeks on a cholesterol-lowering diet, 75 patients were randomised to policosanol or atorvastatin 10mg tablets taken once daily with the evening meal for 8 weeks. An interim and final check-up were performed at 4 and 8 weeks, respectively, after treatment was initiated., Results: At 4 (p < 0.0001) and 8 (p < 0.00001) weeks, policosanol 10 mg/day significantly lowered serum LDL-C levels by 17.5 and 23.1%, respectively compared with baseline; corresponding values for atorvastatin were 28.4 and 29.8%. At study completion, policosanol significantly (p < 0.0001) reduced serum TC (16.4%), LDL-C/HDL-C ratio (25.5%) and TC/HDL-C ratio (19.3%), as well as (p < 0.001) triglyceride levels (15.4%). Atorvastatin significantly (p < 0.0001) decreased serum TC (22.6%), LDL-C/HDL-C (26.2%) and TC/HDL-C (19.8%) ratios, as well as (p < 0.001) triglyceride levels (15.5%). Atorvastatin was significantly more effective than policosanol in reducing LDL-C and TC, but similar in reducing both atherogenic ratios and triglyceride levels. Policosanol, but not atorvastatin, significantly (p < 0.05) increased serum HDL-C levels by 5.3%. Both treatments were well tolerated. At study completion, atorvastatin mildly, but significantly (p < 0.05) increased creatine phosphokinase (CPK) and creatinine, whereas policosanol significantly reduced AST and glucose (p < 0.01) and CPK (p < 0.05) levels. All individual values, however, remained within normal limits. Three atorvastatin but no policosanol patients withdrew from the study because of adverse events: muscle cramps (1 patient), gastritis (1 patient) and uncontrolled hypertension, abdominal pain and myalgia (1 patient). Overall, no policosanol and seven atorvastatin patients (18.9%) reported a total of nine mild or moderate adverse events during the study (p < 0.01)., Conclusions: This study shows that policosanol (10 mg/day) administered for 8 weeks was less effective than atorvastatin (10 mg/day) in reducing serum LDL-C and TC levels in older patients with type II hypercholesterolaemia. Policosanol, but not atorvastatin, however, significantly increased serum HDL-C levels, whereas both drugs similarly reduced atherogenic ratios and serum triglycerides. Policosanol was better tolerated than atorvastatin as revealed by patient withdrawal analysis and overall frequency of adverse events. Nevertheless, further studies must be conducted in larger sample sizes and using dose-titration methods to achieve target lipid levels in order to reach wider conclusions.

This randomized, double-blind study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and tolerability of policosanol and Octa-60 in patients with type II hypercholesterolemia. After 4 weeks on a diet, 110 patients were randomized to policosanol or Octa-60 5 mg tablets once a day for 5 weeks. The dose was then doubled to 10 mg/day for the next 5 weeks. Policosanol 5 and 10 mg/day significantly lowered low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) (p<0.0001 and p<0.00001), the main efficacy variable, by 18.6% and 30.2%, while Octa-60 significantly reduced (p<0.05) LDL-C by 10.0% at study completion only. The frequency of policosanol patients reaching reductions of LDL-C > or = 15% after 5 mg/day (37/55; 67.3%) and 10 mg/day (47/55; 88.7%) was greater (p<0.01 and p<0.01) than in the Octa-60 group, which was 5/55 (9.1%) and 20/55 (36.4%). Likewise, the frequency of patients reaching LDL-C values of <3.4 mmol/l at study completion was greater (p<0.001) in the policosanol group (39/55, 70.9%) than in the Octa-60 group (6/55, 10.9%). Policosanol 5 and 10 mg/day significantly lowered (p<0.00001) total cholesterol (TC) (13.4% and 20.4%), LDL-C/high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) (22.1% and 37.0%) and TC/HDL-C (17.2% and 28.2%). Octa-60 at 10 mg/day lowered (p<0.05) TC (8.7%), LDL-C/HDL-C (12.6%) and TC/HDL-C (9.4%). HDL-C was increased (p<0.001 and 0.0001) by policosanol 5 and 10 mg/day (5.6% and 12.5%) but was unchanged by Octa-60. In both groups, triglycerides remained unchanged. Both treatments were safe and well tolerated. Octa-60, but not policosanol, significantly increased glucose and alanine aminotransferase, but individual values were within the normal range. Four patients (two from each group) discontinued the trial, but only one (in the Octa-60 group) did so because of an adverse event (AE) (skin rash). Overall, three patients (all from the Octa-60 group) reported AEs. In conclusion, original policosanol at 5 and 10 mg/day, but not Octa 60, was effective in patients with type II hypercholesterolemia. Thus, policosanol reached the efficacy criterion for LDL-C reduction in both steps, while Octa-60 failed to reach this goal. In addition, policosanol was better tolerated than Octa-60.