Higher potency statins and the risk of new diabetes: multicentre, observational study of administrative databases

Associations of different types of statins with the risk of open-angle glaucoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Previous studies implied that different types of statins may pose divergent impacts on the risk of glaucoma onset. This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the effects of various statins on the risk of glaucoma occurrence.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from February 1994 to February 2024. We included studies that investigated the effects of various types of statins, fibrates, ezetimibe, cholestyramine, niacin, PCSK9 inhibitors, omega-3 fatty acids, and any cholesterol-lowering medications on glaucoma onset or progression. The revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2.0) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-1) tool were used to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, respectively. The frequentist network meta-analysis framework was utilized to evaluate the comparative effectiveness, with the random effects model applied.

RESULTS

This network meta-analysis comprised 12 studies, encompassing 262,217 individuals and including cholesterol-lowering medications such as statins, fibrates, ezetimibe, cholestyramine, niacin, and omega-3 fatty acids. Our findings demonstrate that comparing to the placebo, rosuvastatin (risk ratio [RR], 1.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.46), simvastatin (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.43), and pravastatin (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.43) increased the risk of glaucoma onset with statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Rosuvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin were each associated with a significantly increased risk of glaucoma onset. We advise medical practitioners to exercise caution when prescribing these specific statins for patients who are at risk of developing glaucoma.

KEY MESSAGES

What is known Previous studies have suggested a link between statins and the risk of developing glaucoma. However, there is still ongoing debate regarding the specific effects of each type of statin on the onset of glaucoma. What is new This network meta-analysis comprehensively evaluated the effects of various statins on the risk of glaucoma onset. Rosuvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin were associated with a significantly increased risk of glaucoma onset.

Effect of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus in patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease: a post-hoc analysis from the LODESTAR randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The impact of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) among patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease (CAD) remains to be clarified. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of NODM in patients with CAD treated with rosuvastatin compared to atorvastatin in the randomized LODESTAR trial.

METHODS

In the LODESTAR trial, patients with CAD were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin or atorvastatin using a 2-by-2 factorial randomization. In this post-hoc analysis, the 3-year incidence of NODM was compared between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin treatment in the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy as the principal population of interest.

RESULTS

Among 2932 patients without diabetes mellitus at baseline, 2377 were included in the as-treated population analysis. In the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between the rosuvastatin and atorvastatin groups (11.4% [106/948] versus 8.8% [73/856], hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98 to 1.77, P = 0.071). When the risk of NODM with rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin was assessed according to the achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level, the risk of NODM began to increase at a LDL-C level below 70 mg/dL. The incidence of NODM was significantly greater in the rosuvastatin group than it was in the atorvastatin group when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL (13.9% versus 8.0%; HR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.73, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Among CAD patients receiving high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. However, a drug effect of the statin type on NODM was observed when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02579499.

Intensity of statin therapy and primary prevention of cardiovascular in Korean patients with dyslipidemia

This study aimed to investigate the association between the intensity of statin therapy and the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes in individuals without prior diabetes who were being treated for dyslipidemia with statins for the primary prevention of CVD, using the National Health Insurance Service-Health Screening database. The database is a longitudinal cohort study of Korean men and women 40 years of age or older who underwent comprehensive biannual screening health examinations by Korean National Health Insurance Service from January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2015. We included patients in the health screening checkup cohort who underwent health checkups in 2009 and 2010.The primary outcome was the occurrence of a first major cardiovascular or cerebrovascular event, new-onset diabetes. A total of 20,322 participants without prior diabetes at baseline from 2009 to 2015 were followed up for a mean duration of 81.2 ± 6.6 months. The mean age of all participants at baseline was 59.2 ± 8.4 years and 43.0% of them were male. Their index low lipoprotein cholesterol level was 130.4 ± mg/dL, the mean duration of taking statins was 337.4 ± 52.3 days, and 93.9% of them had been taking moderate-intensity statins. At that time, a total of 641 diabetes cases occurred, 41 from using low-intensity statins, 588 from moderate-intensity statins, and 11 from high-intensity statins. The results indicated no significant differences in the incidence of death, CVD death, or CVD among those in the strong statin group compared with the reference groups. While statin treatment for the primary prevention of CVD in patients with dyslipidemia showed a subtle difference in the incidence of diabetes, there was no difference in the occurrence of CVD or CVD death according to statin intensity.

Statin use and incident type 2 diabetes mellitus in women after menopause

Menopause is associated with adverse cardiometabolic changes which increase the risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Statins are widely used for primary and secondary CVD prevention, given their beneficial effects on the lipid profile and the vessel wall. On the other hand, statins increase the risk of T2DM. This association has been evaluated mainly in mixed-gender studies, without gender-specific evaluation. This narrative review evaluates the use of statins and the related risk of new-onset T2DM among postmenopausal women. Studies that incorporated a gender-specific analysis report a higher risk of new-onset T2DM in women than in men on treatment with statins. Fewer studies evaluated female-only samples; these confirm the observed association between statin use and new-onset T2DM. Factors influencing the association between statin use and T2DM include the type and dose of statin and the baseline metabolic status. Women may benefit from stratification of their metabolic risk before initiating a statin for CVD prevention.

Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A post-hoc analysis of the RACING trial

AIM

This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this post-hoc subgroup analysis of the RACING trial, patients were analysed based on the presence of MetS. MetS was defined as meeting at least three of the five following criteria: (a) elevated waist circumference; (b) elevated triglycerides; (c) reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; (d) elevated blood pressure; and (e) elevated fasting glucose. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke.

RESULTS

Of the 3780 patients enrolled in the RACING trial, 1703 (45.1%) had MetS at baseline. The primary outcome rate was 10.1% and 10.3% in patients with MetS receiving ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval = 0.72-1.32; p = .868). Lower rates of intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction (3.9% vs. 8.0%; p < .001) and lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (57 vs. 65 mg/dl; p < .001) were observed with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy. Furthermore, the rate of new-onset diabetes was 18.5% and 19.1% in each group (p = .822). There were no significant interactions between MetS and therapy regarding study outcomes in the total population.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with MetS and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy had comparable cardiovascular benefits with those of high-intensity statin monotherapy. Meanwhile, ezetimibe combination therapy was associated with lower drug intolerance and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, but there was no apparent between-group difference in new-onset diabetes.

Generating synthetic data from administrative health records for drug safety and effectiveness studies

Introduction

Administrative health records (AHRs) are used to conduct population-based post-market drug safety and comparative effectiveness studies to inform healthcare decision making. However, the cost of data extraction, and the challenges associated with privacy and securing approvals can make it challenging for researchers to conduct methodological research in a timely manner using real data. Generating synthetic AHRs that reasonably represent the real-world data are beneficial for developing analytic methods and training analysts to rapidly implement study protocols. We generated synthetic AHRs using two methods and compared these synthetic AHRs to real-world AHRs. We described the challenges associated with using synthetic AHRs for real-world study.

Methods

The real-world AHRs comprised prescription drug records for individuals with healthcare insurance coverage in the Population Research Data Repository (PRDR) from Manitoba, Canada for the 10-year period from 2008 to 2017. Synthetic data were generated using the Observational Medical Dataset Simulator II (OSIM2) and a modification (ModOSIM). Synthetic and real-world data were described using frequencies and percentages. Agreement of prescription drug use measures in PRDR, OSIM2 and ModOSIM was estimated with the concordance coefficient.

Results

The PRDR cohort included 169,586,633 drug records and 1,395 drug types for 1,604,734 individuals. Synthetic data for 1,000,000 individuals were generated using OSIM2 and ModOSIM. Sex and age group distributions were similar in the real-world and synthetic AHRs. However, there were significant differences in the number of drug records and number of unique drugs per person for OSIM2 and ModOSIM when compared with PRDR. For the average number of days of drug use, concordance with the PRDR was 16% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12%-19%) for OSIM2 and 88% (95% CI: 87%-90%) for ModOSIM.

Conclusions

ModOSIM data were more similar to PRDR than OSIM2 data on many measures. Synthetic AHRs consistent with those found in real-world settings can be generated using ModOSIM. Synthetic data will benefit rapid implementation of methodological studies and data analyst training.

Association of Strict Versus Lenient Cholesterol Lowering with Cardiac Outcomes, Diabetes Progression and Complications, and Mortality in Patients with Diabetes Treated with Statins: Is Less More?

INTRODUCTION

Whereas some guidelines recommend statin use to achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal < 70 mg/dL for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in patients at higher risk, others recommend against a target LDL-C level. Achieving a target level < 70 mg/dL commonly requires the use of high intensity statins, which has been associated with higher risk of diabetes progression. The objective of this study is to assess the association of strict (≤ 70 mg/dL) versus lenient (> 70 to100 mg/dL) LDL-C lowering on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), diabetes progression, diabetes microvascular complications, and total mortality in patients with diabetes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective propensity score (PS)-matched study from a national cohort of, predominantly male, veterans diagnosed with diabetes without prior cardiovascular disease (from fiscal years 2003-2015), who were initiated on a statin. We created PS to match strict (mean LDL-C during follow-up ≤ 70 mg/dL) versus lenient (mean LDL-C during follow up > 70-100 mg/dL) using 65 baseline characteristics including comorbidities, risk scores, medication classes usage, vital signs, and laboratory data. Outcomes included MACE, diabetes progression, microvascular diabetes complications, and total mortality.

RESULTS

From 80,110 eligible patients, we PS-matched 21,294 pairs of statin initiators with strict or lenient LDL-C lowering. The mean (SD) age was 64 (9.5) years and mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 6 (3) years. MACE was similar in the PS-matched groups [6.1% in strict versus 5.8% in lenient; odds ratio (OR): 1.06; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.98-1.15, P = 0.17]. Diabetes progression was higher among the strict vs lenient group (66.7% in strict versus 64.1% in lenient; OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.08-1.17, P < 0.001). There was no difference in microvascular diabetes complications (22.3% in strict versus 21.9% in lenient; OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.98-1.07, P = 0.31) and no difference in total mortality (14.6% in strict versus 15% in lenient; OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.92-1.02, P = 0.20).

CONCLUSION

Strict compared with lenient lowering of LDL-C with statins in men with diabetes without preexisting ASCVD did not decrease the risk of MACE but was associated with an increased diabetes progression. Clinicians should monitor their patients for diabetes progression upon escalating statins to achieve LDL-C levels ≤ 70 mg/dL.

Rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin treatment in adults with coronary artery disease: secondary analysis of the randomised LODESTAR trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the long term efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin with atorvastatin treatment in adults with coronary artery disease.

DESIGN

Randomised, open label, multicentre trial.

SETTING

12 hospitals in South Korea, September 2016 to November 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

4400 adults (age ≥19 years) with coronary artery disease.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were assigned to receive either rosuvastatin (n=2204) or atorvastatin (n=2196) using 2×2 factorial randomisation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was a three year composite of all cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any coronary revascularisation. Secondary outcomes were safety endpoints: new onset diabetes mellitus; hospital admissions due to heart failure; deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary thromboembolism; endovascular revascularisation for peripheral artery disease; aortic intervention or surgery; end stage kidney disease; discontinuation of study drugs owing to intolerance; cataract surgery; and a composite of laboratory detected abnormalities.

RESULTS

4341 of the 4400 participants (98.7%) completed the trial. Mean daily dose of study drugs was 17.1 mg (standard deviation (SD) 5.2 mg) in the rosuvastatin group and 36.0 (12.8) mg in the atorvastatin group at three years (P<0.001). The primary outcome occurred in 189 participants (8.7%) in the rosuvastatin group and 178 (8.2%) in the atorvastatin group (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.30; P=0.58). The mean low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level during treatment was 1.8 mmol/L (SD 0.5 mmol/L) in the rosuvastatin group and 1.9 (0.5) mmol/L in the atorvastatin group (P<0.001). The rosuvastatin group had a higher incidence of new onset diabetes mellitus requiring initiation of antidiabetics (7.2% v 5.3%; hazard ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.87; P=0.03) and cataract surgery (2.5% v 1.5%; 1.66, 1.07 to 2.58; P=0.02). Other safety endpoints did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with coronary artery disease, rosuvastatin and atorvastatin showed comparable efficacy for the composite outcome of all cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any coronary revascularisation at three years. Rosuvastatin was associated with lower LDL cholesterol levels but a higher risk of new onset diabetes mellitus requiring antidiabetics and cataract surgery compared with atorvastatin.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02579499.

New onset diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular outcomes according to statin intensity in patients after drug-eluting stent implantation in Asian patients

We investigated the effect of statin intensity on the development of new onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) in Korean patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A total of 1013 consecutive patients without diabetes mellitus were retrospectively analyzed. All study patients received high- or moderate-intensity statin (high-intensity statin; 321 [31.7%], moderate-intensity statin; 692 [68.3%]). The primary endpoint was development of NODM, and the secondary one was the composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and any revascularization. In 264 pairs (528 patients) of propensity score-matched patient, NODM developed in 34 patients (6.4%) and composite cardiac events occurred in 73 patients (13.8%) during a median follow-up of 36.7 months. The incidence rate of NODM was significantly higher in patients with high-intensity statin than with moderate-intensity statin (8.3% vs. 4.5%, log-rank P = 0.026). The incidence rate of composite events was not significantly different between the two groups (12.5% vs.15.2%, log-rank P = 0.495). The use of high-intensity statins was associated with NODM after adjustment for multiple risk factors (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.18, 95% confidence interval 1.10‒4.51, P = 0.025). High-intensity statin therapy is associated with a higher incidence of NODM, but not with better cardiovascular outcomes, in Korean patients undergoing PCI. A new cholesterol lowering intensity-based approach rather than stain intensity-based approach to the high-risk patients without diabetes mellitus may be helpful in maximal treatment effect without safety concern of NODM in Asian patients.

Lipid-Lowering Efficacy of Combination Therapy With Moderate-Intensity Statin and Ezetimibe Versus High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy: A Randomized, Open-Label, Non-Inferiority Trial From Korea

Objective

This phase IV, multicenter, randomized controlled, open-label, and parallel clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ezetimibe and moderate intensity rosuvastatin combination therapy to that of high intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

Methods

This study enrolled patients with ASCVD and after a four-week screening period, patients were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin and ezetimibe (RE 10/10 group) or high-intensity rosuvastatin (R20 group) only in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the difference in the percent change in the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level from baseline to 12 weeks between two groups after treatment.

Results

The study found that after 12 and 24 weeks of treatment, the RE10/10 group had a greater reduction in LDL-C level compared to the R20 group (-22.9±2.6% vs. -15.6 ± 2.5% [p=0.041] and -24.2±2.5% vs. -12.9±2.4% [p=0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Moreover, a greater number of patients achieved the target LDL-C level of ≤70 mg/dL after the treatment period in the combination group (74.6% vs. 59.9% [p=0.012] and 76.2% vs. 50.8% [p<0.001] at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively). Importantly, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of overall adverse events and adverse drug reactions between two groups.

Conclusion

Moderate-intensity rosuvastatin and ezetimibe combination therapy had better efficacy in lowering LDL-C levels without increasing adverse effects in patients with ASCVD than high-intensity rosuvastatin monotherapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03494270.

Appropriateness of Intensive Statin Treatment in People with Type Two Diabetes and Mild Hypercholesterolemia: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare moderate- versus high-intensity statin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol less than 130 mg/dL.

METHODS

This was a randomized, open-label, parallel design trial comprised of 79 patients randomly allocated into two groups receiving high-intensity [atorvastatin 40 mg (A40) or rosuvastatin 20 mg (R20) daily] or moderate-intensity [atorvastatin 20 mg (A20) or rosuvastatin 10 (R10) mg daily] statins for eight weeks. The variables investigated were lipid profile, high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and interleukin-6 (IL-6).

RESULTS

The percentage of decrease in LDL levels (±SD) for the high-intensity group (-35.5±25.5) was significantly greater than the moderate-intensity group (-24.6±23.5) (P=0.04). While 38.1% (n:8) of patients receiving A20 and 55% (n:11) of those being on R10 achieved the targets of≥30% reduction in the LDL level, these figures were 63.2% (n=12) and 73.8% (n=14) for A40 and R20 subgroups, respectively. Subsequently, the likelihood of achieving LDL reduction≥30%, was significantly greater with high-intensity statin therapy (OR: 3.1, 95% CI: 1.09, 8.90, P=0.03). Logistic regression analysis also showed that for every 1 mg/ dL increase in the baseline LDL level, the odds of achieving the LDL reduction≥30% increased by 1.04 times [95% CI: (1.01, 1.07), P=0.003].

CONCLUSION

Despite the general conception, moderate-intensity statins are not adequate for the majority of patients with T2DM and mild hyperlipidemia and greater numbers of patients could reach the LDL cholesterol target with high-intensity statin therapy.

Association of Statin Use With Cancer- and Noncancer-Associated Survival Among Patients With Breast Cancer in Asia

Importance

In addition to protective effects on the cardiovascular system, statins may reduce the risk of breast cancer recurrence owing to potential anti-inflammatory benefits. Given that patients with breast cancer in Asia are relatively younger at diagnosis and most are free from traditional cardiovascular risk factors, it is uncertain whether the use of statins can improve survival.

Objective

To investigate the association of statin use with cancer- and noncancer-associated survival in patients with breast cancer.

Design, Setting and Participants

This cohort study used the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database and National Cancer Registry to identify patients diagnosed with breast cancer from January 2012 to December 2017. Age, cancer stage, anticancer therapies, comorbidities, socioeconomic status, and cardiovascular drugs were matched by propensity score method. Statistical analyses, including Cox proportional hazards models, were performed from June 2022 to February 2023. The mean (SD) follow-up duration was 4.10 (2.96) years.

Interventions

Patients receiving statins within 6 months before the diagnosis of breast cancer were compared with those not receiving statins.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Outcomes included death, heart failure, and arterial and venous events.

Results

Overall, 7451 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.3 [9.4] years) treated with statins were matched with 7451 nonusers (mean [SD] age, 65.8 [10.8] years). Compared with nonusers, statin users had a significantly lower risk of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% CI, 0.77-0.91; P < .001). Notably, the risk reduction was mainly attributed to cancer-related death (adjusted HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.92; P < .001). Only a small number of patients died of cardiovascular causes, and the ratios were similar between statin users and nonusers. No significant differences were observed in cardiovascular outcomes, including heart failure and arterial and venous events, between statin users and nonusers. Using a time-dependent analysis, statin users also presented a significantly lower risk of cancer-related death (adjusted HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.24-0.32; P < .001) than nonusers, and notably, the risk was even lower in high-dose statin (HDS) users compared with non-HDS users (HDS users: adjusted HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73-0.98; P = .002; non-HDS users: adjusted HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.91; P = 001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of Asian patients with breast cancer, statin use was associated with a reduced risk of cancer-associated death rather than cardiovascular death. Our findings provide evidence to support the use of statins in patients with breast cancer; however, randomized studies are necessary.

Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe vs. high-intensity statin in patients with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the RACING trial

AIMS

This study evaluated the effect of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was a pre-specified, stratified subgroup analysis of the DM cohort in the RACING trial. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke. Among total patients, 1398 (37.0%) had DM at baseline. The incidence of the primary outcome was 10.0% and 11.3% among patients with DM randomized to ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.22; P = 0.460). Intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug was observed in 5.2% and 8.7% of patients in each group, respectively (P = 0.014). LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 81.0%, 83.1%, and 79.9% of patients in the ezetimibe combination therapy group, and 64.1%, 70.2%, and 66.8% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all P < 0.001). In the total population, no significant interactions were found between DM status and therapy regarding primary outcome, intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction, and the proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL.

CONCLUSION

Ezetimibe combination therapy effects observed in the RACING trial population are preserved among patients with DM. This study supports moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy as a suitable alternative to high-intensity statins if the latter cannot be tolerated, or further reduction in LDL cholesterol is required among patients with DM and ASCVD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier:NCT03044665.

Assessing the Incidence of New-onset Diabetes Mellitus with Statin Use: A Systematic Review of the Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

Statin use has been linked with new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM). In the present systematic review, we aimed to determine the incidence of NODM with statin use by assessing and summarizing the data generated by different systematic reviews and metaanalyses published on this topic. We conducted a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses using a pre-defined study protocol. Two authors independently performed a literature search using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for studies reporting data on statin use and NODM incidence and screened and extracted data for the outcomes of interest. The Assessing the Methodological Auality of Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the included systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The initial search yielded 621 potential records, and 16 relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included in the present systematic review. The included studies showed an increase in the risk of NODM with statin use. In particular, rosuvastatin and atorvastatin were associated with NODM in many systematic reviews or meta-analyses; however, pravastatin and pitavastatin were found to be associated with lower or no risk. We observed a positive trend of development of NODM with statin use became more evident with advancing years as more number of studies were added. Intensive doses of statins and use in older subjects were found to be important risk factors for NODM. Finally, the quality assessment revealed that the included systematic reviews and metaanalyses were of critically low or low quality. We concluded that statin use carries a risk of causing NODM. Statins should not be discouraged in anticipation of NODM. However, glycaemic monitoring should be encouraged with the on-going statin therapy. Furthermore, clinical studies addressing the use of statins and the incidence of NODM as their primary objective should be planned.

Effects of rosuvastatin on serum glucose and insulin in hyperuricemic rats

Background

Hyperuricemia is a state in which the serum levels of uric acid (UA) are elevated. This study was to determine the roles of rosuvastatin in fasting blood glucose (FGB) and insulin levels in hyperuricemic rats.

Methods

Thirty-six Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats were randomized divided into the control, model and rosuvastatin groups: the control was given no intervention, the model group was established by administrating yeast extract powder and oxonic acid potassium salt, and the rosuvastatin group was given intravenous administration of rosuvastatin for 28 days in hyperuricemic rats. Serum uric acid (SUA), fasting blood glucose (FBG), fasting blood insulin (FBI), glutamic acid decarboxylase antibody (GADA), oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) levels, and the ultrastructure of pancreatic β-cells were measured. Also, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) scores was computed in three groups.

Results

Compared to the model group, SUA were decreased, while the FBG, GADA, OGTT and HOMA-IR at week 4 were significantly increased in rosuvastatin group. However, FBI was not significantly changed between three groups. It was also showed that the structure of pancreatic β-cells was damaged and the number of β-cells was changed in hyperuricemic rats while they were aggravated in rosuvastatin group.

Conclusion

Rosuvastatin has roles in inducing FGB, GADA, OGTT and pancreatic β-cells damage in hyperuricemic rats.

Statin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

A 2016 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) was associated with reduced mortality and cardiovascular outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2016 review on statins for primary prevention of CVD to inform the USPSTF.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to November 2021); surveillance through May 20, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials on statins vs placebo or no statin and statin intensity in adults without prior cardiovascular events; large cohort studies on harms.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

All-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, composite cardiovascular outcomes, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included: 22 trials (N = 90 624) with 6 months to 6 years of follow-up compared statins vs placebo or no statin, 1 trial (n = 5144) compared statin intensities, and 3 observational studies (n = 417 523) reported harms. Statins were significantly associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.87 to 0.98]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.35% [95% CI, -0.57% to -0.14%]), stroke (RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.90]; ARD, -0.39% [95% CI, -0.54% to -0.25%]), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.75]; ARD, -0.85% [95% CI, -1.22% to -0.47%]), and composite cardiovascular outcomes (RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81]; ARD, -1.28% [95% CI, -1.61% to -0.95%]); the association with cardiovascular mortality was not statistically significant (RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.02]; ARD, -0.13%). Relative benefits were consistent in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics, although data for persons older than 75 years were sparse. Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased risk of serious adverse events (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.01]), myalgias (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.11]), or elevated alanine aminotransferase level (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.13]). Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased diabetes risk overall (RR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.19]), although 1 trial found high-intensity statin therapy was significantly associated with increased risk (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.49]). Otherwise, there were no clear differences in outcomes based on statin intensity.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In adults at increased CVD risk but without prior CVD events, statin therapy for primary prevention of CVD was associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality and CVD events. Benefits of statin therapy appear to be present across diverse demographic and clinical populations, with consistent relative benefits in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics.

Long-term efficacy and safety of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (RACING): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Drug combinations rather than increasing doses of one drug can achieve greater efficacy and lower risks. Thus, as an alternative to high-intensity statin monotherapy, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy can lower LDL cholesterol concentrations effectively while reducing adverse effects. However, evidence from randomised trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes is needed.

METHODS

In this randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) at 26 clinical centres in South Korea were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy (rosuvastatin 10 mg with ezetimibe 10 mg) or high-intensity statin monotherapy (rosuvastatin 20 mg). The primary endpoint was the 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke, in the intention-to-treat population with a non-inferiority margin of 2·0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03044665 and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 14, 2017, and Dec 18, 2018, 3780 patients were enrolled: 1894 patients to the combination therapy group and 1886 to the high-intensity statin monotherapy group. The primary endpoint occurred in 172 patients (9·1%) in the combination therapy group and 186 patients (9·9%) in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (absolute difference -0·78%; 90% CI -2·39 to 0·83). LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 73%, 75%, and 72% of patients in the combination therapy group, and 55%, 60%, and 58% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all p<0·0001). Discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug by intolerance was observed in 88 patients (4·8%) and 150 patients (8·2%), respectively (p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with ASCVD, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy was non-inferior to high-intensity statin monotherapy for the 3-year composite outcomes with a higher proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL and lower intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction.

FUNDING

Hanmi Pharmaceutical.

Modest effect of statins on fasting glucose in a longitudinal electronic health record based cohort

BACKGROUND

Prior studies of the glycemic effect of statins have been inconsistent. Also, most studies have only considered a short duration of statin use; the effect of long-term statin use on fasting glucose (FG) has not been well examined. The aim of this work is to investigate the effect of long-term statin exposure on FG levels.

METHODS

Using electronic health record (EHR) data from a large and diverse longitudinal cohort, we defined long-term statin exposure in two ways: the cumulative years of statin use (cumulative supply) and the years' supply-weighted sum of doses (cumulative dose). Simvastatin, lovastatin, atorvastatin and pravastatin were included in the analysis. The relationship between statin exposure and FG was examined using linear regression with mixed effects modeling, comparing statin users before and after initiating statins and statin never-users.

RESULTS

We examined 593,130 FG measurements from 87,151 individuals over a median follow up of 20 years. Of these, 42,678 were never-users and 44,473 were statin users with a total of 730,031 statin prescriptions. FG was positively associated with cumulative supply of statin but not comulative dose when both measures were in the same model. While statistically significant, the annual increase in FG attributable to statin exposure was modest at only 0.14 mg/dl, with only slight and non-significant differences among statin types.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevation in FG level is associated with statin exposure, but the effect is modest. The results suggest that the risk of a clinically significant increase in FG attributable to long-term statin use is small for most individuals.

Dyslipidemia and 10-year diabetes incidence in Japanese people: Population-based Panasonic cohort study 9

Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and LDL/HDL ratio have been associated with new-onset diabetes; however, their cut-off levels have not been determined. We clarified the association between dyslipidemia and the incidence of diabetes. People who underwent a health checkup under a program conducted by Panasonic Corporation from 2008 to 2018 were included. In total, 87,570 participants were included, of whom 5,110 developed type 2 diabetes. Cox regression analyses and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the association between LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, or LDL/HDL ratio and incident diabetes and to identify the cut-off values for incident diabetes. Multivariate analysis showed that LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and LDL/HDL ratio were significantly associated with the risk of incident type 2 diabetes. Further, the area under the ROC curve and optimized cut-off values for LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and LDL/HDL ratio for incident type 2 diabetes at 10 years were 0.613 and 124 mg/dl, 0.640 and 54 mg/dl, and 0.662 and 2.4 mg/dl, respectively. The LDL/HDL ratio with a cut-off value of 2.4 was a better predictor of incident diabetes within 10 years than LDL and HDL cholesterol.

The Role of Statins on Helicobacter pylori Eradication: Results from the European Registry on the Management of H. pylori (Hp-EuReg)

Statins could increase the effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori eradication therapies due to their anti-inflammatory effect. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of this therapeutic association in real life. This is a multicenter, prospective, non-interventional study aimed at evaluating the management of H. pylori by European gastroenterologists. Patients were registered in an e-CRF by AEG-REDCap from 2013 to 2020. The association between statin use and H. pylori eradication effectiveness was evaluated through multivariate analysis. Overall, 9988 and 705 patients received empirical and culture-guided treatment, respectively. Overall, statin use was associated with higher effectiveness in the empirical group (OR = 1.3; 95%CI = 1.1–1.5), but no association was found with first-line treatment effectiveness (N = 7738); as an exception, statin use was specifically associated with lower effectiveness of standard triple therapy (OR = 0.76; 95%CI = 0.59–0.99). In the rescue therapy empirical group (N = 2228), statins were associated with higher overall effectiveness (OR = 1.9; 95%CI = 1.4–2.6). However, sub-analyses by treatment schemes only confirmed this association for the single-capsule bismuth quadruple therapy (OR = 2.8; 95%CI = 1.3–5.7). No consistent association was found between statin use and H. pylori therapy effectiveness. Therefore, the addition of statins to the usual H. pylori treatment cannot be currently recommended to improve cure rates.

Atorvastatin Regulates MALAT1/miR-200c/NRF2 Activity to Protect Against Podocyte Pyroptosis Induced by High Glucose

BACKGROUND

Diabetic nephropathy (DN) is one of the main complications of diabetes mellitus (DM), which leads to the long-term loss of kidney functions. Long noncoding RNAs (LncRNAs) can alleviate DN by interacting with microRNAs (miRNAs). In this work, we aimed to explore the effects of the MALAT1/miR-200c/NRF2 regulatory axis on the pyroptosis and oxidative stress (Oxidative stress, OS) of renal podocytes in high glucose (HG) environment and whether the lipid-lowering drug atorvastatin (AT) can relieve renal OS through this approach.

METHODS

MPC-5, a mouse podocyte cell line, was induced by HG as a cell model. The protein expressions of caspase-1, GSDMD, NLRP3, NRF2, etc. were detected by Western blotting and immunofluorescence, and the mRNA level of caspase-1, GSDMD, NLRP3, NRF2, MALAT1, miR-200c was tested by qRT-PCR. The cell pyroptosis of podocytes treated with AT was verified by CCK-8 or flow cytometry. The levels of Malondialdehyde (MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and glutathione (GSH) were measured by spectrophotometer, respectively.

RESULTS

The caspase-1 was upregulated in time-dependent manner and got the peak at 48 h and 30 mmol/L respectively in MPC-5 cells treated with HG. Further, the expression of GSDMD, MALAT1 and miR-200c were increased, while the level of NRF2, HO-1, OS-related indicators, were decreased simultaneously. Knockdown the MALAT1 protected MPC-5 cells from pyroptosis and OS induced by HG. However, overexpressing miR-200c in control-group cells increased pyroptosis and upregulated the OS level with HG culture medium. Further, atorvastatin protected MPC-5 cells from cell pyroptosis and downregulated the level of renal OS via attenuating the expression of MALAT1 and miR-200c.

CONCLUSION

Atorvastatin protects podocyte cells via MALAT1/miR-200c/NRF2 signal pathway from pyroptosis and OS induced by HG.

Leveraging the Capabilities of the FDA's Sentinel System To Improve Kidney Care

The Sentinel System is a national electronic postmarketing resource established by the US Food and Drug Administration to support assessment of the safety and effectiveness of marketed medical products. It has built a large, multi-institutional, distributed data network that contains comprehensive electronic health data, covering about 700 million person-years of longitudinal observation time nationwide. With its sophisticated infrastructure and a large selection of flexible analytic tools, the Sentinel System permits rapid and secure analyses, while preserving patient privacy and health-system autonomy. The Sentinel System also offers enhanced capabilities, including accessing full-text medical records, supporting randomized clinical trials embedded in healthcare delivery systems, and facilitating effective collection of patient-reported data using mobile devices, among many other research programs. The nephrology research community can use the infrastructure, tools, and data that this national resource offers for evidence generation. This review summarizes the Sentinel System and its ability to rapidly generate high-quality, real-world evidence; discusses the program's experience in, and potential for, addressing gaps in kidney care; and outlines avenues for conducting research, leveraging this national resource in collaboration with Sentinel investigators.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a Canadian multicentre observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have widely replaced warfarin for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Our objective was to compare the safety and effectiveness of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus warfarin for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in the Canadian setting.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based observational multicentre cohort study with propensity score matching and subsequent meta-analysis. We used health care databases from 7 Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia). Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who initiated anticoagulation therapy in 2009-2017 were matched to an equal number who initiated warfarin. The primary outcome was the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for ischemic stroke or systemic embolization. Secondary outcomes included pooled HRs for major bleeding; a composite outcome of stroke, systemic embolization, major bleeding and all-cause mortality; and myocardial infarction. We modelled HRs using proportional hazard Cox regression with inverse probability of censoring weights, and estimated pooled HRs with random-effect meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We included 128 273 patients who initiated anticoagulation with a DOAC (40 503 dabigatran, 49 498 rivaroxaban and 38 272 apixaban) and 128 273 patients who initiated anticoagulation with warfarin. The pooled HR for ischemic stroke or systemic embolization comparing DOACs to warfarin was 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87 to 1.19). Direct oral anticoagulants were associated with lower rates of major bleeding (pooled HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.97), the composite outcome (pooled HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.89) and all-cause mortality (pooled HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.85).

INTERPRETATION

In this real-world study, DOACs were associated with similar risks of ischemic stroke or systemic embolization, and lower risks of bleeding and total mortality compared to warfarin. These findings support the use of DOACs for anticoagulation in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT03596502.

Effect of Switching from Low-Dose Simvastatin to High-Dose Atorvastatin on Glucose Homeostasis and Cognitive Function in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

High-intensity statin is recommended in high-risk type 2 diabetes (T2D); however, statin dose dependently increases the risk of developing new-onset diabetes, can potentially worsen glycemic control in T2D, and may cause cognitive impairment. This study aimed to investigate the effect of statin intensification on glucose homeostasis and cognitive function in T2D.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

T2D patients who were taking simvastatin ≤20 mg/day were randomized to continue taking the same dosage of simvastatin (low-dose simvastatin group; LS, n=63) for 12 weeks, or to change to atorvastatin 40 mg/day for 6 weeks, and if tolerated, atorvastatin was increased to 80 mg/day for 6 weeks (high-dose atorvastatin group; HS, n=62). Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), plasma insulin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and of β-cell function (HOMA-B), cognitive functions using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Trail Making Test (TMT) were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 58.8±8.9 years, and 72% were female. Mean baseline FPG and HbA1c were 124.0±27.5 mg/dl and 6.9±0.8%, respectively. No differences in baseline characteristics between groups were observed. Change in HbA1c from baseline in the LS and HS groups was -0.1% and +0.1% (p=0.03) at 6 weeks, and -0.1% and +0.1% (p=0.07) at 12 weeks. There were no significant differences in FPG, fasting plasma insulin, HOMA-B, HOMA-IR, MoCA score, or TMT between groups at 6 or 12 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Switching from low-dose simvastatin to high-dose atorvastatin in T2D resulted in a slight increase in HbA1c (0.1%) without causing cognitive decline.

Statins and Higher Diabetes Mellitus Risk: Incidence, Proposed Mechanisms, and Clinical Implications

3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors are ubiquitously prescribed for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention and treatment. However, the use of statins has been linked to the development of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM), which could possibly increase future CVD risk. This phenomenon necessitates a clear discussion of the possible etiologies of this relationship and its broader clinical consequences. We discuss the reported incidence of NODM in statin users through a rigorous review of data from metaanalyses of randomized control trials examining this association. We also highlight the various possible mechanisms responsible for the development of statin-induced diabetes mellitus. Finally, we examine the clinical implications of this effect on future CVD risk and identify specific patient factors that can be used for risk-stratification strategies. Data from 14 randomized control trials metaanalyses suggest a 9-33% higher risk of NODM with statin use. Several cellular, molecular, and genetic mechanisms, as well as lifestyle habits, have been identified as potential underlying factors responsible for this elevated risk. The principle mode of the diabetogenic action of statins is still unclear, though it is likely the result of a complex interplay of pancreatic and extrapancreatic effects. It is understood that patient populations with a greater predisposition to diabetes mellitus, and those with thicker epicardial adiposity are more at risk for the development of statin-induced NODM. Despite these observations, robust data from a variety of investigations suggest that the CVD preventative benefits of statin treatment significantly outweigh the risks associated with the development of NODM. Nevertheless, further study must better identify the causative mechanisms involved in this process, its natural history, and the unique factors that will help clinicians risk stratify and appropriately monitor patients on statin therapy.

Time- and Dose-Dependent Association of Statin Use With Risk of Clinically Relevant New-Onset Diabetes Mellitus in Primary Prevention: A Nationwide Observational Cohort Study

Background

Given that statins are increasingly being used for primary‐prevention, the public concerns regarding the risk of new‐onset diabetes mellitus associated with statin use may be an issue.

Methods and Results

Using healthcare data from the national health insurance examinees, our study comprised a cohort of adults aged ≥40 years with hypercholesterolemia who would be eligible for statin therapy for primary prevention from 2005 to 2012. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically relevant new‐onset diabetes mellitus requiring medical therapy. Among 2 162 119 adults with hypercholesterolemia who might be eligible for statin therapy, 638 625 (29.5%) ever used statins and 1 523 494 (70.5%) never used statins. In the propensity‐matched cohort of 518 491 pairs, during mean follow‐up of 3.9 years, being an ever‐user of statin was significantly associated with diabetes mellitus risk compared with being a never‐user of statin (13.4 versus 6.9 per 1000 person‐years; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.88; 95% CI, 1.85–1.93). With increasing duration of statin use, the risk of diabetes mellitus was proportionally increased (HR 1.25 <1 year, HR 2.22 for 1–2 years, and HR 2.62 >2 years). An excess risk of diabetes mellitus was also associated with a higher intensity (HR 1.75 for low‐to‐moderate potency and HR 2.31 for high potency) and a cumulative dosing of statin (HR 1.06 for low‐tertile, HR 1.74 for middle‐tertile, and HR 2.52 for high‐tertile of defined‐daily‐disease).

Conclusions

In patients receiving statin therapy for primary prevention, there was a time‐ and dose‐dependent association of statin use with an increasing risk of new‐onset diabetes mellitus.

See Editorial Robinson

Balancing cardiovascular benefit and diabetogenic harm of therapy with statins: Real-world evidence from Italy

AIM

To provide information on the balance between the cardiovascular (CV) benefit and the diabetogenic harm of statin therapy in the current clinical practice.

METHODS

All the 115,939 residents (older than 50 years) in the Italian Lombardy Region newly treated with statins between 2003 and 2005, were followed from the first statin prescription until 2012 to identify those experiencing a macrovascular complication and those with at least one sign suggestive of new onset diabetes. The proportion of days of follow-up covered by statin prescriptions measured adherence with statins. Hazard ratio, and relative 95% confidence interval (CI), for the two considered outcomes associated with statin adherence, were separately estimated (proportional hazard models). Number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH), i.e., number of individuals who must be treated with statins in order to prevent a macrovascular complication, or to generate a new onset diabetes, respectively, were calculated to evaluate the balance between CV benefit and diabetogenic harm of statin therapy.

RESULTS

Compared to those at very low adherence with statins, patients at high adherence showed a significant reduction of macrovascular risk (28%, 95% CI: 23%-33%) and a greater risk of developing diabetic condition (67%, 50%-86%). In the whole cohort, the NNT was 26, whereas the NNH 65. NNT was lower than NNH also in all considered strata of age, gender, clinical profile.

CONCLUSIONS

This large cohort investigation provides real-world evidence that the balance between CV benefit and diabetogenic harm of statin therapy is largely favourable to treatment benefits.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation: A retrospective cohort study

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are high-priority medications, frequently used with clinically important benefit and serious harm. Our objective was to compare the safety and effectiveness of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus warfarin in a population where anticoagulation management and DOACs were readily available. A retrospective cohort study of all adults living in British Columbia with a diagnosis of atrial fibrillation and a first prescription for an OAC was conducted. Co-primary outcomes were ischemic stroke and systemic embolism, and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included a net clinical outcome composite and analysis of discontinuation, switching, and key subgroups. We estimated the effects of treatment using time-to-event models with high-dimensional propensity score adjustment to control confounding. After adjustment for prescribing bias, a cohort (n = 20,113, 43.8% female, mean age 72.4 years) with a mean follow-up of 18.1 months showed that patients taking warfarin tended to be poorer, sicker, and less likely to have a cardiologist prescriber. Outcome event rates were not significantly different for DOACs compared to warfarin [adjusted rate ratio of 1.15 (0.91, 1.46) for systemic embolism, 0.94 (0.82, 1.08) for major bleeding, and 0.98 (0.90, 1.06) for net clinical outcome]. Only the effect of age on net clinical outcome met our strict criteria for predicting which group might be superior. Switch of drug class was associated with increased risk of events (p < 0.003). In this population, we found no difference in important clinical outcomes between warfarin and DOACs. Switching compared to not switching was associated with harm.

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe Combination Therapy and Rosuvastatin Monotherapy on Lipoprotein in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study

INTRODUCTION

Ezetimibe/statin combination therapy has been reported to provide additional cardioprotective effects compared to statin monotherapy. The apolipoprotein B/A1 (apoB/A1) ratio is an effective predictor of cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin/ezetimibe combination therapy versus rosuvastatin monotherapy using the apoB/A1 ratio in patients with diabetes and hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

In this randomized, multicenter, open-label, parallel-group study, patients were randomly assigned to receive the combination therapy of rosuvastatin 5 mg/ezetimibe 10 mg once daily (n = 68) or monotherapy with rosuvastatin 10 mg once daily (n = 68), for 8 weeks.

RESULTS

After the 8-week treatment, percentage change (least-square means ± standard error) in the apoB/A1 ratio in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group was significantly decreased compared to the rosuvastatin group (- 46.14 ± 1.58% vs.  - 41.30 ± 1.58%, respectively; P = 0.03). In addition, the proportion of patients achieving > 50% reduction in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) and in the comprehensive lipid target (LDL-C < 70 mg/dL, non-HDL-cholesterol [non-HDL-C] < 100 mg/dL, and apoB < 80 mg/dL) was significantly different between the two groups (76.5 and 73.5% in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group and 47.1 and 45.6% in the rosuvastatin group, respectively; P < 0.001). The reduction in total cholesterol, non-HDL-C, LDL-C, and apoB were greater in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group than in the rosuvastatin group. Both treatments were well tolerated, and no between-group differences in drug-related adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

The apoB/A1 ratio was significantly reduced in patients receiving combination therapy with ezetimibe and rosuvastatin compared to those receiving rosuvastatin monotherapy. Both treatments were well tolerated in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypercholesterolemia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03446261.

Incidence of new-onset diabetes with 1 mg versus 4 mg pitavastatin in patients at high risk of developing diabetes during a 3-year follow-up

Background

Statin therapy reduces the risk of cardiovascular events across a broad spectrum of patients; however, it increases the risk of new-onset diabetes (NOD). Although the highest dose pitavastatin is considered to not be associated with NOD, there are limited data regarding the impact of long-term highest dose pitavastatin use on the development of NOD in patients at high risk of developing diabetes. Therefore, we prospectively compared the differences in the development of NOD between the lowest and the highest dose of pitavastatin in patients at high risk of developing diabetes during a 3-year follow-up.

Methods

This post hoc analysis of a prospective, single-blinded, randomized study compared the risk of NOD between the highest dose of pitavastatin (4 mg) and the lowest dose of pitavastatin (1 mg) over a 3-year follow-up in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Among 1044 patients of the original study, 667 patients at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus were in the subgroup analysis. The primary endpoint was a comparison of the differences in the cumulative incidence of NOD in the pitavastatin 1 mg and 4 mg groups during a 3-year follow-up.

Results

With propensity score matching, there were no significant differences in baseline demographic characteristics between the 2 groups. Incidence of NOD was similar between the pitavastatin 1 mg and 4 mg groups [12 of 289 patients (4.2%) and 8 of 289 patients (2.8%), respectively; p = 0.36]. In a prespecified analysis, there were no significant differences in NOD events according to sex, age, diagnosis, body mass index, glucose intolerance, or dyslipidemia.

Conclusions

Administration of highest-dose pitavastatin did not increase the risk of NOD in patients at high risk of developing diabetes during the 3-year follow-up. Moreover, various risk factors for NOD such as metabolic syndrome components, glucose intolerance, dyslipidemia, obesity, or hypertension did not affect the development of NOD during pitavastatin administration. Thus, the highest dose pitavastatin can be safely used in patients with metabolic syndrome who are at high risk of developing diabetes.

Trial registration Clinical Trial registration information. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02545231. Unique identifier: NCT02545231

Comparison of the Efficacy of Rosuvastatin Monotherapy 20 mg with Rosuvastatin 5 mg and Ezetimibe 10 mg Combination Therapy on Lipid Parameters in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

The apolipoprotein B/A1 (apoB/A1) ratio is a stronger predictor of future cardiovascular disease than is the level of conventional lipids. Statin and ezetimibe combination therapy have shown additional cardioprotective effects over statin monotherapy.

METHODS

This was a single-center, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study in Korea. A total of 36 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomized to either rosuvastatin monotherapy (20 mg/day, n=20) or rosuvastatin/ezetimibe (5 mg/10 mg/day, n=16) combination therapy for 6 weeks.

RESULTS

After the 6-week treatment, low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and apoB reduction were comparable between the two groups (-94.3±15.4 and -62.0±20.9 mg/dL in the rosuvastatin group, -89.9±22.7 and -66.8±21.6 mg/dL in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group, P=0.54 and P=0.86, respectively). In addition, change in apoB/A1 ratio (-0.44±0.16 in the rosuvastatin group and -0.47±0.25 in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group, P=0.58) did not differ between the two groups. On the other hand, triglyceride and free fatty acid (FFA) reductions were greater in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group than in the rosuvastatin group (-10.5 mg/dL [interquartile range (IQR), -37.5 to 29.5] and 0.0 μEq/L [IQR, -136.8 to 146.0] in the rosuvastatin group, -49.5 mg/dL [IQR, -108.5 to -27.5] and -170.5 μEq/L [IQR, -353.0 to 0.8] in the rosuvastatin/ezetimibe group, P=0.010 and P=0.049, respectively). Both treatments were generally well tolerated, and there were no differences in muscle or liver enzyme elevation.

CONCLUSION

A 6-week combination therapy of low-dose rosuvastatin and ezetimibe showed LDL-C, apoB, and apoB/A1 ratio reduction comparable to that of high-dose rosuvastatin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Triglyceride and FFA reductions were greater with the combination therapy than with rosuvastatin monotherapy.

Diabetogenic effect of pravastatin is associated with insulin resistance and myotoxicity in hypercholesterolemic mice

Background

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are cholesterol-lowering drugs widely used to treat hypercholesterolemia and prevent cardiovascular disease. Statins are generally well tolerated, but adverse reactions may occur, particularly myopathy and new onset of diabetes. The exact mechanism of statin-induced myopathy and diabetes has not been fully elucidated. We have previously shown that treatment of hypercholesterolemic (LDLr^−/−) mice with pravastatin for 2 months decreased pancreatic islet insulin secretion and increased oxidative stress and cell death, but no glucose intolerance was observed. The purpose of the current work was to study long-term pravastatin effects on glucose homeostasis, insulin sensitivity, muscle protein turnover and cell viability.

Methods

LDLr^−/− mice were treated with pravastatin for 3, 6 and 10 months. Glucose tolerance, insulin resistance and glucose-stimulated insulin secretion were evaluated. The rates of protein synthesis and degradation were determined in gastrocnemius muscle after 10 months of treatment. Insulin signalling, oxidative stress and cell death were analysed in vitro using C2C12 myotubes.

Results

After 6 and 10 months of treatment, these mice became glucose intolerant, and after 10 months, they exhibited marked insulin resistance. Reduced islet glucose-stimulated insulin secretion was observed after the 3rd month of treatment. Mice treated for 10 months showed significantly decreased body weight and increased muscle protein degradation. In addition, muscle chymotrypsin-like proteasomal activity and lysosomal cathepsin were markedly elevated. C2C12 myotubes exposed to increasing concentrations of pravastatin presented dose-dependent impairment of insulin-induced Akt phosphorylation, increased apoptotic markers (Bax protein and cleaved caspase-3) and augmented superoxide anion production.

Conclusions

In addition to reduced insulin secretion, long-term pravastatin treatment induces insulin resistance and muscle wasting. These results suggest that the diabetogenic effect of statins is linked to the appearance of myotoxicity induced by oxidative stress, impaired insulin signalling, proteolysis and apoptosis.

Assessment of effect modification of statins on new-onset diabetes based on various medical backgrounds: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between statin use and new-onset diabetes in clinical settings and to assess its effect modification (heterogeneity) among patients with various medical histories and current medications.

METHODS

In a total of 12,177 Japanese patients without diabetes, from December 2004 to November 2012, we identified 500 statin users and 500 matched non-users using propensity-score matching. Patients were followed until December 2017. We estimated the hazard ratios of new-onset diabetes associated with statin use. We also tested the heterogeneity of the treatment effect by evaluating subgroup interactions in subgroups according to sex, age, medical history, and current medication.

RESULTS

New-onset diabetes had occurred in 71 patients (13.6%) with statin use and 43 patients (8.3%) with non-use at 5 years (hazard ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 2.48; P = 0.0143), and in 78 patients (15.6%) with statin use and 48 patients (9.6%) with non-use at 10 years (hazard ratio, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.10 to 2.37; P = 0.0141). There were no significant treatment-by-subgroup interactions in all subgroups defined according to sex, age, medical history, and current medication.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with various clinical backgrounds, those who received statin therapy had a higher risk of new-onset diabetes at 5 and 10 years than those who did not receive it. Effect modification of statins on new-onset diabetes was not found in patient populations defined according to various comorbid diseases or concomitant drugs.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) "Remission" in Non-bariatric Patients 65 Years and Older

Objective: To analyze the factors associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) “remission” in non-bariatric Medicare patients 65 years and older.

Research Design and Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of a Medicare Advantage health plan was conducted using administrative data. An individual was identified as T2DM if the individual had: ≥ 2 medical claims for T2DM coded 250.xx excluding type 1 diabetes; or ≥ 2 pharmacy claims related to T2DM; or ≥ 2 combined medical claims, pharmacy claims for T2DM in 12 months. A T2DM individual was in “remission” if they had no T2DM related claims for more than 12 months continuously. This is different from the standard American Diabetes Association (ADA) definition of remission which includes HbA1c values and hence is represented in quotation (as “remission”). 10,059 T2DM individuals were evaluated over a period of 8 years from 2008 to 2015. Cox proportional hazards was used to identify significant variables associated with T2DM “remission.”

Results: 4.97% of patients studied met the definition of T2DM “remission” in the study cohort. After adjusting for covariates this study found a number of variables associated with T2DM “remission” that were not previously reported: no statin use; low diabetes complications severity index score; no hypertension; no neuropathy; no retinopathy; race (non-white and non-African American); presence of other chronic ischemic heart disease (IHD) and females (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: T2DM “remission” in Medicare patients 65 years and older is observed in a community setting in a small proportion of non-bariatric patients.

Collaborative-controlled LASSO for constructing propensity score-based estimators in high-dimensional data

Propensity score-based estimators are increasingly used for causal inference in observational studies. However, model selection for propensity score estimation in high-dimensional data has received little attention. In these settings, propensity score models have traditionally been selected based on the goodness-of-fit for the treatment mechanism itself, without consideration of the causal parameter of interest. Collaborative minimum loss-based estimation is a novel methodology for causal inference that takes into account information on the causal parameter of interest when selecting a propensity score model. This "collaborative learning" considers variable associations with both treatment and outcome when selecting a propensity score model in order to minimize a bias-variance tradeoff in the estimated treatment effect. In this study, we introduce a novel approach for collaborative model selection when using the LASSO estimator for propensity score estimation in high-dimensional covariate settings. To demonstrate the importance of selecting the propensity score model collaboratively, we designed quasi-experiments based on a real electronic healthcare database, where only the potential outcomes were manually generated, and the treatment and baseline covariates remained unchanged. Results showed that the collaborative minimum loss-based estimation algorithm outperformed other competing estimators for both point estimation and confidence interval coverage. In addition, the propensity score model selected by collaborative minimum loss-based estimation could be applied to other propensity score-based estimators, which also resulted in substantive improvement for both point estimation and confidence interval coverage. We illustrate the discussed concepts through an empirical example comparing the effects of non-selective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with selective COX-2 inhibitors on gastrointestinal complications in a population of Medicare beneficiaries.

The extent to which statins have improved cardiovascular outcomes: Lessons from randomized trials and observational studies of "real world" practice in people with diabetes

Statins are the mainstay of therapy for cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with diabetes mellitus. It is estimated that there are more than half a billion patients with diabetes mellitus worldwide and the numbers of prevalent cases of diabetes are expected to increase in both developed and developing countries in the next decade. Statins reduce risk of mortality and morbidity mainly by reducing blood low density cholesterol. Statins, along with other medical treatments, are responsible for about half of the decrease in cardiovascular mortality over the past several decades. Multiple clinical trials have found evidence for statin use in patients with diabetes, for both primary prevention and secondary prevention. The benefit of statins in patients with coronary heart disease and diabetes in terms of absolute risk reduction is twice as much as compared to the risk in patients with coronary heart disease but no diabetes. The proportion of patients with diabetes treated with statins has increased steadily over the past few decades with concurrent decrease in cardiovascular deaths in this high-risk population. However, there are significant unmet needs in cardiovascular risk reduction, due to underutilization of statins and due to residual cardiovascular risk despite maximal statin therapy. Future strategies in population risk reduction in diabetics should include maximal statin therapy, additional treatment with nonstatin therapy and new paradigms of prevention with early intervention with shorter, more intensive therapy to potentially "reverse" atherosclerosis with goals of reducing clinical cardiovascular disease later in life.

Tramadol and the risk of seizure: nested case-control study of US patients with employer-sponsored health benefits

OBJECTIVES

Tramadol is a widely prescribed analgesic that influences both opioid and monoamine neurotransmission. While seizures have been reported with its use, the risk in clinical practice has not been well characterised. We examined risk of seizure with tramadol relative to codeine, a comparable opioid analgesic.

DESIGN

Retrospective nested case-control study. For each case, we identified up to 10 controls matched on age, sex, US state of residence and date of cohort entry (±365 days). We calculated ORs to determine the association between seizure and exposure to tramadol, codeine (≥15 mg), both or neither, in the preceding 30 days.

SETTING

Cohort of patients, who had continuous health coverage and resided in the same state for≥3 years, identified from linked administrative health data in US MarketScan databases from 2009 to 2012.

PARTICIPANTS

We identified 96 753 patients with seizure and 888 540 matched controls.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

In the primary analysis, we defined cases using a broad definition of seizure (based on either an outpatient physician claim for seizure disorder or a seizure-related emergency department visit or hospitalisation). In a secondary analysis, we used a more specific definition of seizure restricted to a hospital visit with a principal diagnosis of seizure.

RESULTS

In the primary analysis, we found no association between risk of seizure and exposure to tramadol compared with codeine (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.15). However, in the secondary analysis (using a more specific definition of seizure), this association was statistically significant (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Tramadol was not associated with an increased risk of seizure defined by inpatient and outpatient diagnoses. However, this finding was sensitive to the outcome definition used and requires further study.

Analysis of glycemic status in diabetes-naïve patients on statins: A hospital-based cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION:

Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and meta-analysis suggest risk of hyperglycemia in patients on statins, and this association is being viewed with renewed interest globally. The present study has tried to explore the possible diabetogenic effect of statins, the mechanism of this effect, and various comorbidities associated with this causation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

This cross-sectional study was carried out at the Department of Cardiology from October 2015 to March 2017. Patients on statins for at least 1 year and normoglycemic at the time of statin initiation were recruited in the study. The outcome of the present study was development of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM). Blood glucose levels and insulin levels were estimated. Other adverse reactions of statins and associated comorbidities in the patients were recorded. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze adverse drug reactions.

RESULTS:

A total of 104 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which eight patients (7.7%) developed NODM and 4 (3.8%) developed prediabetes. Atorvastatin 40 mg was most commonly prescribed statin. About 25% of patients taking atorvastatin 80 mg developed diabetes

CONCLUSION:

Statins have a mild-to-moderate risk of developing NODM. The dose of statins is an important factor that increases the risk of diabetes in statin users

Statin treatment and increased diabetes risk. Possible mechanisms

Statins have been associated with an increased risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM), as confirmed in previous observational studies and meta-analyses. Controversy exists as to whether this risk varies depending on statin type or dose. However, there appears to be unanimity regarding the different associated factors that raise this risk. Furthermore, diverse pathophysiologic mechanisms have been described that could explain the increased risk of diabetes in patients with statin treatment. These fundamentally cause a rise in insulin resistance together with a decrease in insulin secretion. The present review aimed to describe the relationship between statin treatment and the presence of diabetes and provide an update of previous published evidence and the possible mechanisms involved.

Usefulness of Low-Dose Statin Plus Ezetimibe and/or Nutraceuticals in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Intolerant to High-Dose Statin Treatment

High-dose statin (HDS) therapy is recommended to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C); however, some patients are unable to tolerate the associated side effects. Nutraceuticals have shown efficacy in lowering LDL-C. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the combination of low-dose statin (LDS) plus ezetimibe (EZE) or LDS plus nutraceutical (Armolipid Plus [ALP] containing red yeast rice, policosanol, and berberine) can lead to a higher proportion of high-risk patients achieving target LDL-C. A secondary objective was to assess the efficacy of triple combination LDS + EZE + ALP in resistant patients (LDL-C >70 mg/dl). A randomized, prospective, parallel-group, single-blind study was conducted in patients with coronary artery disease (n = 100) who had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention in the preceding 12 months, were HDS-intolerant, and were not at LDL-C target (<70 mg/dl) with LDS alone. Patients received either LDS + EZE or LDS + ALP. Of the 100 patients, 33 patients (66%) treated with LDS + EZE and 31 patients (62%) treated with LDS + ALP achieved target LDL-C after 3 months, which was maintained at 6 months. Patients who did not achieve the therapeutic goal received a triple combination of LDS + EZE + ALP for a further 3 months. At 6 months, 28 of 36 patients (78%) achieved LDL-C target. Overall, 92% of patients enrolled in this study were at target LDL-C at 6 months. No patients in any group experienced major side effects. In conclusion, in HDS-intolerant coronary artery disease patients, the combination of LDS plus EZE and/or ALP represents a valuable therapeutic option allowing most patients to reach target LDL-C within 3 to 6 months.

How pharmacoepidemiology networks can manage distributed analyses to improve replicability and transparency and minimize bias

Several pharmacoepidemiology networks have been developed over the past decade that use a distributed approach, implementing the same analysis at multiple data sites, to preserve privacy and minimize data sharing. Distributed networks are efficient, by interrogating data on very large populations. The structure of these networks can also be leveraged to improve replicability, increase transparency, and reduce bias. We describe some features of distributed networks using, as examples, the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies, the Sentinel System in the USA, and the European Research Network of Pharmacovigilance and Pharmacoepidemiology. Common protocols, analysis plans, and data models, with policies on amendments and protocol violations, are key features. These tools ensure that studies can be audited and repeated as necessary. Blinding and strict conflict of interest policies reduce the potential for bias in analyses and interpretation. These developments should improve the timeliness and accuracy of information used to support both clinical and regulatory decisions.

Association between statin treatment and new-onset diabetes mellitus: a population based case-control study

BACKGROUND

Several studies suggest that statin may increase the risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM). This study aimed to evaluate the association between the duration and recent use of statin, and the risk of NODM, based on population-based data sets.

METHODS

We used the South Korean National Health Insurance Service National Sample Cohort database for this nationwide case-control study. Of the 1 million participants, 6417 participants with NODM in 2012-2013 and 32,085 controls without diabetes (1:5 propensity score matched with age, sex, index year, and year of diabetes diagnosis) were included. In these patients, we examined the statin prescription record for 3 years preceding the outcome. We used conditional logistic regression to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

After adjustment of covariates, there were no significant differences in the risk of NODM when analyzed according to cumulative use days. The risk of NODM was increased only in the short-term and recent user group (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.82) whose cumulative prescription days are less than 6 months and whose last prescription is within 6 months of diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of NODM was not associated with an increase in the cumulative duration of statin use or with non-recent use. Only recent short-term use of statin was associated with an increased risk of NODM. Diabetes screening are warranted during initial statin therapy.

Statins associate with improved mortality among patients with certain histological subtypes of lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

To measure the association between statin exposure and mortality in lung cancer patients belonging to different categories of histological subtype.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort of 19,974 individuals with incident lung cancer between 2007 and 2011 was identified using the SEER-Medicare linked database. Statin exposure both pre- and post-diagnosis was analyzed to identify a possible association with cancer-specific mortality in patients stratified by histological subtype. Intention-to-treat analyses and time-dependent Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) corresponding to statin exposure both pre- and post-diagnosis, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall baseline statin exposure was associated with a decrease in mortality risk for squamous-cell carcinoma patients (HR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.82-0.96) and adenocarcinoma patients (HR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.82-0.94), but not among those with small-cell lung cancer. Post-diagnostic statin exposure was associated with prolonged survival in squamous-cell carcinoma patients (HR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.59-0.79) and adenocarcinoma patients (HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.68-0.89) in a dose-dependent manner.

CONCLUSION

There is consistent evidence indicating that baseline or post-diagnostic exposure to simvastatin and atorvastatin is associated with extended survival in non-small-cell lung cancer subtypes. These results warrant further randomized clinical trials to evaluate subtype-specific effects of certain statins in patient cohorts with characteristics similar to those examined in this study.