-
European Heart Journal Dec 2016The efficacy and safety of different statins for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients in the primary prevention setting remain to be established. In the... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
The efficacy and safety of different statins for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients in the primary prevention setting remain to be established. In the present meta-analysis, 18 studies with 736 HIV-positive patients receiving combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) and treated with statins in the primary prevention setting were included (21.0% women, median age 44.1 years old). The primary endpoint was the effect of statin therapy on total cholesterol (TC) levels. Rosuvastatin 10 mg and atorvastatin 10 mg provided the largest reduction in TC levels [mean -1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-1.99, -1.35) mmol/L; and mean -1.44, 95% CI (-1.85, -1.02) mmol/L, respectively]. Atorvastatin 80 mg and simvastatin 20 mg provided the largest reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) [mean -2.10, 95% CI (-3.39, -0.81) mmol/L; and mean -1.57, 95% CI (-2.67, -0.47) mmol/L, respectively]. Pravastatin 10-20 mg [mean 0.24, 95% CI (0.10, 0.38) mmol/L] and atorvastatin 10 mg [mean 0.15, 95% CI (0.007, 0.23) mmol/L] had the largest increase in high-density lipoprotein, whereas atorvastatin 80 mg [mean -0.60, 95% CI (-1.09, -0.11) mmol/L] and simvastatin 20 mg [mean -0.61, 95% CI (-1.14, -0.08) mmol/L] had the largest reduction in triglycerides. The mean discontinuation rate was 0.12 per 100 person-years [95% CI (0.05, 0.20)], and was higher with atorvastatin 10 mg [26.5 per 100 person-years, 95% CI (-13.4, 64.7)]. Meta-regression revealed that nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors-sparing regimens were associated with reduced efficacy for statin's ability to lower TC. Statin therapy significantly lowers plasma TC and LDL levels in HIV-positive patients and is associated with low rates of adverse events. Statins are effective and safe when dose-adjusted for drug-drug interactions with cART.
Topics: Adult; Anticholesteremic Agents; Atorvastatin; Cholesterol, LDL; Female; HIV Infections; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Male; Primary Prevention; Pyrroles; Rosuvastatin Calcium; Simvastatin
PubMed: 26851703
DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv734 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2009This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001. At that stage there was insufficient evidence to recommend statins for the prevention of Alzheimer's... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001. At that stage there was insufficient evidence to recommend statins for the prevention of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The scope of this review has been expanded to include all forms of dementia.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of statins in the prevention of dementia.
SEARCH STRATEGY
The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS were searched on 10 October 2007 using the terms statin*, lovastatin*, pravastatin*, simvastatin*, fluvastatin*, atorvastatin* and rosuvastatin*. The CDCIG Register contains records from many healthcare databases, SIGLE, LILACS as well as many trials databases and is updated regularly.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials of statins in people at risk of AD and dementia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two independent reviewers extracted and assessed data independently and agreement was reached after discussion. Adverse effects were noted.
MAIN RESULTS
Two trials were identified with 26,340 participants; HPS 2002 and PROSPER 2002. Age range was 40-82 years across the two studies, PROSPER 2002 included 5804 patients aged 70-82 years and HPS included 20,536 patients with 5806 at least 70 years old at study entry. Mean total cholesterol 5.9 mmol/l, LDL cholesterol 3.4 mmol/l at study entry with mean reduction in LDL cholesterol of 1.0 mmol/l in simvastatin treated patients compared to placebo in HPS 2002. Mean total cholesterol 5.7 mmol/l, LDL cholesterol 3.8 mmol/l at study entry with mean reduction in LDL cholesterol of 1.02 mmol/l in pravastatin treated patients compared to placebo in PROSPER 2002. Mean follow-up 3.2 years in PROSPER, 5 years in HPS 2002. Cognition was measured at different times and with different scales so could not be combined in a meta-analysis. There was no difference in incidence of dementia in HPS 2002 (31 cases in simvastatin group, 31 cases in placebo group) nor in performance on the modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status at final follow-up (23.7% simvastatin group cognitively impaired vs 24.2% in placebo group). There was no difference in cognition between groups either in relation to age at study entry or previous history of cerebrovascular disease. Cognitive function declined at the same rate in both treatment groups in PROSPER 2002, there was no significant difference between pravastatin treated and placebo groups in performance on letter digit codes, picture word learning test, Stroop and Mini Mental State Examination. There was no evidence that statins were detrimental to cognition.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is good evidence from RCTs that statins given in late life to individuals at risk of vascular disease have no effect in preventing AD or dementia. Biologically it seems feasible that statins could prevent dementia due to their role in cholesterol reduction and initial evidence from observational studies was very promising. Indication bias may have been a factor in these studies however and the evidence from subsequent RCTs has been negative.
Topics: Alzheimer Disease; Anticholesteremic Agents; Cognition; Dementia; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Pravastatin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Simvastatin
PubMed: 19370582
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003160.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Familial hypercholesterolemia is one of the most common inherited metabolic diseases and is an autosomal dominant disorder meaning heterozygotes, or carriers, are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Familial hypercholesterolemia is one of the most common inherited metabolic diseases and is an autosomal dominant disorder meaning heterozygotes, or carriers, are affected. Those who are homozygous have severe disease. The average worldwide prevalence of heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia is at least 1 in 500, although recent genetic epidemiological data from Denmark and next generation sequencing data suggest the frequency may be closer to 1 in 250. Diagnosis of familial hypercholesterolemia in children is based on elevated total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels or DNA-based analysis, or both. Coronary atherosclerosis has been detected in men with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia as young as 17 years old and in women with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia at 25 years old. Since the clinical complications of atherosclerosis occur prematurely, especially in men, lifelong treatment, started in childhood, is needed to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. In children with the disease, diet was the cornerstone of treatment but the addition of lipid-lowering medications has resulted in a significant improvement in treatment. Anion exchange resins, such as cholestyramine and colestipol, were found to be effective, but they are poorly tolerated. Since the 1990s studies carried out on children aged 6 to 17 years with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia have demonstrated significant reductions in their serum total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. While statins seem to be safe and well-tolerated in children, their long-term safety in this age group is not firmly established. This is an update of a previously published version of this Cochane Review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of statins in children with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia.
SEARCH METHODS
Relevant studies were identified from the Group's Inborn Errors and Metabolism Trials Register and Medline.Date of most recent search: 20 February 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized and controlled clinical studies including participants up to 18 years old, comparing a statin to placebo or to diet alone.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
We found 26 potentially eligible studies, of which we included nine randomized placebo-controlled studies (1177 participants). In general, the intervention and follow-up time was short (median 24 weeks; range from six weeks to two years). Statins reduced the mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration at all time points (moderate quality evidence). Serum aspartate and alanine aminotransferase, as well as creatinine kinase concentrations, did not differ between treated and placebo groups at any time point (low quality evidence). The risks of myopathy (low quality evidence) and clinical adverse events (moderate quality evidence) were very low and also similar in both groups. In one study simvastatin was shown to improve flow-mediated dilatation of the brachial artery (low quality evidence), and in another study treatment with pravastatin for two years induced a significant regression in carotid intima media thickness (low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Statin treatment is an effective lipid-lowering therapy in children with familial hypercholesterolemia. No significant safety issues were identified. Statin treatment seems to be safe in the short term, but long-term safety remains unknown. Children treated with statins should be carefully monitored and followed up by their pediatricians and their care transferred to an adult lipidologist once they reach 18 years of age. Large long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the long-term safety issues of statins.
Topics: Adolescent; Alanine Transaminase; Aspartate Aminotransferases; Brachial Artery; Carotid Intima-Media Thickness; Child; Child, Preschool; Cholesterol, LDL; Creatine Kinase; Female; Heterozygote; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Hyperlipoproteinemia Type II; Male; Puberty; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vasodilation
PubMed: 28685504
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006401.pub4 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Jun 2003To determine by how much statins reduce serum concentrations of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and incidence of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) events and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To determine by how much statins reduce serum concentrations of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and incidence of ischaemic heart disease (IHD) events and stroke, according to drug, dose, and duration of treatment.
DESIGN
Three meta-analyses: 164 short term randomised placebo controlled trials of six statins and LDL cholesterol reduction; 58 randomised trials of cholesterol lowering by any means and IHD events; and nine cohort studies and the same 58 trials on stoke.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Reductions in LDL cholesterol according to statin and dose; reduction in IHD events and stroke for a specified reduction in LDL cholesterol.
RESULTS
Reductions in LDL cholesterol (in the 164 trials) were 2.8 mmol/l (60%) with rosuvastatin 80 mg/day, 2.6 mmol/l (55%) with atorvastatin 80 mg/day, 1.8 mmol/l (40%) with atorvastatin 10 mg/day, lovastatin 40 mg/day, simvastatin 40 mg/day, or rosuvastatin 5 mg/day, all from pretreatment concentrations of 4.8 mmol/l. Pravastatin and fluvastatin achieved smaller reductions. In the 58 trials, for an LDL cholesterol reduction of 1.0 mmol/l the risk of IHD events was reduced by 11% in the first year of treatment, 24% in the second year, 33% in years three to five, and by 36% thereafter (P < 0.001 for trend). IHD events were reduced by 20%, 31%, and 51% in trials grouped by LDL cholesterol reduction (means 0.5 mmol/l, 1.0 mmol/l, and 1.6 mmol/l) after results from first two years of treatment were excluded (P < 0.001 for trend). After several years a reduction of 1.8 mmol/l would reduce IHD events by an estimated 61%. Results from the same 58 trials, corroborated by results from the nine cohort studies, show that lowering LDL cholesterol decreases all stroke by 10% for a 1 mmol/l reduction and 17% for a 1.8 mmol/l reduction. Estimates allow for the fact that trials tended to recruit people with vascular disease, among whom the effect of LDL cholesterol reduction on stroke is greater because of their higher risk of thromboembolic stroke (rather than haemorrhagic stroke) compared with people in the general population.
CONCLUSIONS
Statins can lower LDL cholesterol concentration by an average of 1.8 mmol/l which reduces the risk of IHD events by about 60% and stroke by 17%.
Topics: Cholesterol, LDL; Cohort Studies; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Myocardial Ischemia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Stroke
PubMed: 12829554
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1423 -
Annals of Translational Medicine Dec 2019Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a multi-causal disease and no satisfactory therapeutic strategies for it. Statins have been suggested as potential drugs in PH, whose...
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is a multi-causal disease and no satisfactory therapeutic strategies for it. Statins have been suggested as potential drugs in PH, whose effects in different clinic types of PH have not been conclusive. In this study, we included randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of statins therapy in PH.
METHODS
We searched databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane, PubMed and Web of science, with time up to January 1, 2019. With 95% confidence interval (CI), weighted mean difference (WMD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) was pooled and calculated in a random or fixed effect model according to I2 statistic.
RESULTS
A total of nine RCTs with 657 patients were included. Four types of statins (atorvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin and simvastatin) were used at different doses (10-80 mg daily) for up to 6 months. In the pooled-data analysis, compared with placebo, there were significant improvements in pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP), in addition to low-density lipoprotein (LDL) in patients treated with statins, but not in 6-minute walking distance (6MWD), cardiac index (CDI). No more adverse events and all-cause mortality were revealed. Subgroup analysis indicated that statins could decrease PAP in the subtype of PH due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but not pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH).
CONCLUSIONS
This study indicates that statins can efficiently and safely reduce PAP in PH, especially in the subtype due to COPD. Further RCTs are needed to focus on the efficacy and safety of statin therapy in different subtypes of PH.
PubMed: 32042802
DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.11.19 -
Asian Journal of Andrology 2017The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of statins type or even when grouping statins by hydrophilic or hydrophobic nature on prostate cancer risk. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of statins type or even when grouping statins by hydrophilic or hydrophobic nature on prostate cancer risk. A literature search was performed without language restrictions using the databases of PubMed (1984.1-2015.3), MEDLINE (1984.1-2015.3), and EMBASE (1990.1-2015.3). Two independent reviewers appraised eligible studies and extracted data. Weighted averages were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Statistic heterogeneity scores were assessed with the standard Cochran's Q-test and I2 statistic. Publication bias was detected using the Begg's and Egger's tests. All statistical analyses were conducted by STATA version 10. Finally, fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Both hydrophilic and hydrophobic statins showed no association with incidence of prostate cancer (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.82-1.17; RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.73-1.08, respectively). Meanwhile, the risk of prostate cancer was not reduced in simvastatin (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.72-1.05), pravastatin (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.94-1.11), atorvastatin (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.76-1.02), fluvastatin (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.97-1.01), or lovastatin users (RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.79-1.08). The funnel plot showed that there was no publication bias. The results showed that statins had a neutral effect on prostate cancer risk; hydrophilic and hydrophobic statins as well as any subtype of statins did not affect the risk of prostate cancer.
Topics: Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Incidence; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Risk
PubMed: 27924788
DOI: 10.4103/1008-682X.190327 -
The Journal of the American Board of... 2005Type 2 diabetes is a serious, costly, and increasingly common disease. Several conditions commonly seen in family medicine settings confer increased risk of developing... (Review)
Review
Type 2 diabetes is a serious, costly, and increasingly common disease. Several conditions commonly seen in family medicine settings confer increased risk of developing diabetes. Among these conditions are impaired glucose tolerance, impaired fasting glucose, obesity, gestational diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and menopause. We here present the results of a systematic review of the literature examining the evidence for different strategies aimed at preventing type 2 diabetes in patients with these conditions. The strongest evidence supports an intensive lifestyle intervention designed to induce modest weight loss. The greatest degree of prevention, based on lesser quality evidence, may be imparted by bariatric surgery. Metformin and troglitazone have appreciable evidence in specific populations, and orlistat and acarbose have slightly less evidence among obese patients, for preventing diabetes. Ramipril, captopril, losartan, pravastatin, and estrogens show some very preliminary promise for preventing diabetes in patients treated for hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and menopause, but each needs a more rigorous evaluation. Although more questions remain to be answered, family physicians now have tools available to help our patients lead lives free of diabetes.
Topics: Bariatrics; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Hormone Replacement Therapy; Humans; Hyperlipidemias; Hypertension; Male; Menopause; Obesity
PubMed: 15709062
DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.18.1.37 -
Atherosclerosis Oct 2016The effect of statin therapy on plasma adiponectin levels has not been conclusively studied. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate this effect through a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
The effect of statin therapy on plasma adiponectin levels has not been conclusively studied. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate this effect through a systematic review and meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
Quantitative data synthesis was performed using a random-effects model with weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) as summary statistics.
RESULTS
In 30 studies (43 study arms) with 2953 participants, a significant increase in plasma adiponectin levels was observed after statin therapy (WMD: 0.57 μg/mL, 95% CI: 0.18, 0.95, p = 0.004). In subgroup analysis, atorvastatin, simvastatin, rosuvastatin, pravastatin and pitavastatin were found to change plasma adiponectin concentrations by 0.70 μg/mL (95% CI: -0.26, 1.65), 0.50 μg/mL (95% CI: -0.44, 1.45), -0.70 μg/mL (95% CI: -1.08, -0.33), 0.62 μg/mL (95% CI: -0.12, 1.35), and 0.51 μg/mL (95% CI: 0.30, 0.72), respectively. With respect to duration of treatment, there was a significant increase in the subset of trials lasting ≥12 weeks (WMD: 0.88 μg/mL, 95% CI: 0.19, 1.57, p = 0.012) but not in the subset of <12 weeks of duration (WMD: 0.18 μg/mL, 95% CI: -0.23, 0.58, p = 0.390). Random-effects meta-regression suggested a significant association between statin-induced elevation of plasma adiponectin and changes in plasma low density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (slope: 0.04; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.06; p = 0.002).
CONCLUSIONS
The meta-analysis showed a significant increase in plasma adiponectin levels following statin therapy. Although statins are known to increase the risk for new onset diabetes mellitus, our data might suggest that the mechanism for this is unlikely to be due to a reduction in adiponectin expression.
Topics: Adiponectin; Adult; Aged; Atorvastatin; Cardiovascular Diseases; Female; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Male; Middle Aged; Pravastatin; Quinolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Regression Analysis; Rosuvastatin Calcium; Simvastatin
PubMed: 27498397
DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2016.07.897 -
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Oct 2016Randomized controlled trials have shown mixed findings regarding the association of statins and diabetes. This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Randomized controlled trials have shown mixed findings regarding the association of statins and diabetes. This systematic literature review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to update evidence on this association to possibly assist clinicians in making more informed treatment choices.
METHODS
We identified studies relevant to our NMA by performing study searches in databases like Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed, published between August 2010 and June 2014. Pre-2010 studies were identified from bibliography of previously published meta-analyses. Unpublished study data were found from clinicaltrial.gov. Data synthesis was performed by pairwise meta-analysis and NMA within a Frequentist framework.
RESULTS
Twenty nine trials in which 1 63 039 participants had been randomized were included in this review; among these 1 41 863 were non-diabetic patients. The direct meta-analysis showed that statins, as a class, significantly increased the likelihood of developing diabetes by 12% (pooled OR 1.12; 95%CI 1.05-1.21; I 36%; p = 0.002; 18 RCTs). In the NMA, atorvastatin 80 mg was associated with a highest risk of diabetes, with OR of 1.34 (95%CI 1.14-1.57) followed by rosuvastatin (OR: 1.17; 95%CI: 1.02-1.35). The ORs (95%CIs) for simvastatin 80 mg, simvastatin, atorvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin and pitavastatin were 1.21 (0.99-1.49), 1.13 (0.99-1.29), 1.13 (0.94-1.34), 1.04 (0.93-1.16), 0.98 (0.69-1.38) and 0.74 (0.31-1.77), respectively. High-dose atorvastatin increased the odds of developing diabetes even when compared with pravastatin, simvastatin and low-dose atorvastatin in the NMA.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results, statins, as a class, increased the risk of diabetes significantly in the pairwise meta-analysis. Overall, there appears to be a small increased risk of incident diabetes, particularly with more intensive statin therapy, although more data would be valuable to increase the robustness of this interpretation, given that the lower confidence intervals of our study analyses are close to, or just crossing one. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Topics: Confidence Intervals; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk
PubMed: 27277934
DOI: 10.1002/pds.4020 -
Health Technology Assessment... Apr 2007To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of statins for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in adults with, or at risk of,... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of statins for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in adults with, or at risk of, coronary heart disease (CHD).
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases were searched between November 2003 and April 2004.
REVIEW METHODS
A review was undertaken to identify and evaluate all literature relating to the clinical and cost effectiveness of statins in the primary and secondary prevention of CHD and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the UK. A Markov model was developed to explore the costs and health outcomes associated with a lifetime of statin treatment using a UK NHS perspective.
RESULTS
Thirty-one randomised studies were identified that compared a statin with placebo or with another statin, and reported clinical outcomes. Meta-analysis of the available data from the placebo-controlled studies indicates that, in patients with, or at risk of, CVD, statin therapy is associated with a reduced relative risk of all cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, CHD mortality and fatal myocardial infarction (MI), but not of fatal stroke. It is also associated with a reduced relative risk of morbidity [non-fatal stroke, non-fatal MI, transient ischaemic attack (TIA), unstable angina] and of coronary revascularisation. It is hardly possible, on the evidence available from the placebo-controlled trials, to differentiate between the clinical efficacy of atorvastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin. However, there is some evidence from direct comparisons between statins to suggest that atorvastatin may be more effective than pravastatin in patients with symptomatic CHD. There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of statins in different subgroups. Statins are generally considered to be well tolerated and to have a good safety profile. This view is generally supported both by the evidence of the trials included in this review and by postmarketing surveillance data. Increases in creatine kinase and myopathy have been reported, but rhabdomyolysis and hepatotoxicity are rare. However, some patients may receive lipid-lowering therapy for as long as 50 years, and long-term safety over such a timespan remains unknown. In secondary prevention of CHD, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) increase with age varying between pound 10,000 and pound 17,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) for ages 45 and 85 respectively. Sensitivity analyses show these results are robust. In primary prevention of CHD there is substantial variation in ICERs by age and risk. The average ICERs weighted by risk range from pound 20,000 to pound 27,500 for men and from pound 21,000 to pound 57,000 for women. The results are sensitive to the cost of statins, discount rates and the modelling time frame. In the CVD analyses, which take into account the benefits of statins on reductions in stroke and TIA events, the average ICER weighted by risk level remains below pound 20,000 at CHD risk levels down to 0.5%. Limitations of the analyses include the requirement to extrapolate well beyond the timeframe of the trial period, and to extrapolate effectiveness results from higher risk primary prevention populations to the treatment of populations at much lower risk. Consequently, the results for the lower age bands and lower risks are subject to greater uncertainty and need to be treated with caution.
CONCLUSIONS
There is evidence to suggest that statin therapy is associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of primary and secondary cardiovascular events. As the confidence intervals for each outcome in each prevention category overlap, it is not possible to differentiate, in terms of relative risk, between the effectiveness of statins in primary and secondary prevention. However, the absolute risk of CHD death/non-fatal MI is higher, and the number needed to treat to avoid such an event is consequently lower, in secondary than in primary prevention. The generalisability of these results is limited by the exclusion, in some studies, of patients who were hypersensitive to, intolerant of, or known to be unresponsive to, statins, or who were not adequately compliant with study medication during a placebo run-in phase. Consequently, the treatment effect may be reduced when statins are used in an unselected population. The results of the economic modelling show that statin therapy in secondary prevention is likely to be considered cost-effective. In primary prevention, the cost-effectiveness ratios are dependent on the level of CHD risk and age, but the results for the CVD analyses offer support for the more aggressive treatment recommendation issued by recent guidelines in UK. Evidence on clinical endpoints for rosuvastatin is awaited from on-going trials. The potential targeting of statins at low-risk populations is however associated with major uncertainties, particularly the likely uptake and long-term compliance to lifelong medication by asymptomatic younger patients. The targeting, assessment and monitoring of low-risk patients in primary care would be a major resource implication for the NHS. These areas require further research.
Topics: Bayes Theorem; Coronary Disease; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Male; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Quality of Life
PubMed: 17408535
DOI: 10.3310/hta11140