-
Medicine Jun 2017The high recurrent rate of chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) has consistently confused the neurosurgeons, and the role of atorvastatin in the management of CSDH has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The high recurrent rate of chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) has consistently confused the neurosurgeons, and the role of atorvastatin in the management of CSDH has remained unclear over past decade, and atorvastatin seems to be a safe and cost-effective treatment to CSDH. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a systematic review to discuss the effect of atorvastatin in CSDH.
METHOD
We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the China Biology Medicine disc, up to March 2017, for published studies on the effects of atorvastatin in the management of CSDH, and reviewers performed a brief qualitative descriptive analysis of atorvastatin's efficacy in the management of CSDH.
RESULTS
Three eligible studies were included in this systematic review. Results indicated that atorvastatin accelerated hematoma absorption, decreased recurrence risk, and surgical requirement.
CONCLUSION
Limited evidence suggests that oral atorvastatin may be beneficial in the management of CSDH. Further high-quality studies focused on dosage, duration, hematoma size are needed to further elucidate the role of atorvastatin in the management of CSDH.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Atorvastatin; Hematoma, Subdural, Chronic; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors
PubMed: 28658127
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007290 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2011Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory demyelinating disease of the human central nervous system. Statins, prescribed as cholesterol lowering agents, have shown... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory demyelinating disease of the human central nervous system. Statins, prescribed as cholesterol lowering agents, have shown possible effects for treating MS in experimental and preliminary clinical studies.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of statins administered alone or as add-on to approved treatments for MS.
SEARCH METHODS
The Trials Search Coordinator searched the Cochrane MS Group Trials Register (1 August 2011). We searched the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) (1979 to 1 August 2011), trials registers and conference proceedings. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of included studies were contacted for additional information.There were no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing statins with placebo, or comparing statins in combination with approved treatments alone for patients with MS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
Four trials involving 458 participants were included. All trials compared statins (two evaluating atorvastatin and two simvastatin) plus interferon beta-1a with interferon beta-1a alone for treating MS. The methodological quality was good for three studies and poor for remaining one. None of them showed statistically significant difference between both treatment groups in reducing relapses, preventing disease progression or developing new T2 or gadolinium-enhanced lesions on MRI after 9, 12, 24 months follow up period. Statins resulted to be safe and well tolerated, no serious adverse effects were reported. Changes on quality of life after receiving statins were not reported in the trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no convincing evidence to support the use of either atorvastatin or simvastatin as an adjunctive therapy in MS.
Topics: Atorvastatin; Disease Progression; Heptanoic Acids; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Interferon-beta; Multiple Sclerosis; Pyrroles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention; Simvastatin
PubMed: 22161428
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008386.pub3 -
TouchREVIEWS in Endocrinology Nov 2022Statin 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... (Review)
Review
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.
PubMed: 36694884
DOI: 10.17925/EE.2022.18.2.96 -
Evidence-based Complementary and... 2021Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a common clinical cardiovascular disease, and its morbidity and mortality rates are increasing, which brings a serious burden to the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a common clinical cardiovascular disease, and its morbidity and mortality rates are increasing, which brings a serious burden to the family and society. Dyslipidemia is one of the most important risk factors for CHD. However, it is difficult to reduce blood lipids to an ideal state with the administration of a statin alone. Tongxinluo capsule (TXLC), as a Chinese patent medicine, has received extensive attention in the treatment of CHD in recent years. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide evidence-based medicine for TXLC combined with atorvastatin in the treatment of CHD.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate systematically the effectiveness and safety of TXLC combined with atorvastatin in the treatment of CHD.
METHODS
Seven English and Chinese electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, VIP, CBM, and Wanfang) were searched from inception to January 2020, to search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on TXLC combined with atorvastatin in the treatment of CHD. Two researchers independently screened the literature according to the literature inclusion and exclusion criteria and performed quality assessment and data extraction on the included RCTs. We performed a systematic review following Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and using a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR 2). The quality of outcomes was evaluated by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). And meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager 5.2.
RESULTS
A total of 15 RCTs with 1,578 participants were included in this review. Compared to atorvastatin treatment, TXLC combined with atorvastatin treatment showed potent efficacy when it came to the effectiveness of clinical treatment (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.18, 1.29; < 0.00001), total cholesterol (TC; MD = -1.21; 95% CI, -1.53, -0.89; < 0.00001), triacylglycerol (TG; MD = -0.73; 95% CI, -0.81, -0.65; < 0.00001), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C; MD = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.23, 0.31; < 0.00001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; MD = -0.72; 95% CI, -0.80, -0.64; < 0.00001), C-reactive protein (CRP; SMD = -2.06; 95% CI, -2.56, -1.57; < 0.00001), frequency of angina pectoris (SMD = -1.41; 95% CI, -1.97, -0.85; < 0.00001), duration of angina pectoris (MD = -2.30; 95% CI, -3.39, -1.21; < 0.0001), and adverse reactions (RR = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.51, 1.39; =0.50). No serious adverse events or reactions were mentioned in these RCTs. According to the PRISMA guidelines, although all studies were not fully reported in accordance with the checklist item, the reported items exceeded 80% of all items. With the AMSTAR 2 standard, the methodological quality assessment found that 9 studies were rated low quality and 6 studies were rated critically low quality. Based on the results of the systematic review, the GRADE system recommended ranking method was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and the recommendation level. The results showed that the level of evidence was low, and the recommendation intensity was a weak recommendation.
CONCLUSIONS
TXLC combined with atorvastatin in the treatment of CHD can effectively improve the effectiveness of clinical treatment, significantly reduce the frequency and duration of angina pectoris, decrease blood lipids, and improve inflammatory factors. However, due to the low quality of the literature included in these studies and the variability of the evaluation methods of each study, there is still a need for a more high-quality, large sample, multicenter clinical randomized control for further demonstration.
PubMed: 34335841
DOI: 10.1155/2021/9413704 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology Aug 2022To update our previously reported systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes by focusing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIMS
To update our previously reported systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies on cardiovascular drug exposure and COVID-19 clinical outcomes by focusing on newly published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
More than 500 databases were searched between 1 November 2020 and 2 October 2021 to identify RCTs that were published after our baseline review. One reviewer extracted data with other reviewers verifying the extracted data for accuracy and completeness.
RESULTS
After screening 22 414 records, we included 24 and 21 RCTs in the qualitative and quantitative syntheses, respectively. The most investigated drug classes were angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs) and anticoagulants, investigated by 10 and 11 studies respectively. In meta-analyses, ACEI/ARBs did not affect hospitalization length (mean difference -0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.83; 0.98 d, n = 1183), COVID-19 severity (risk ratio/RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.71; 1.15, n = 1661) or mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.92, 95% CI 0.58; 1.47, n = 1646). Therapeutic anticoagulation also had no effect (hospitalization length mean difference -0.29, 95% CI -1.13 to 0.56 d, n = 1449; severity RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70; 1.04, n = 2696; and, mortality RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77; 1.13, n = 5689). Other investigated drug classes were antiplatelets (aspirin, 2 trials), antithrombotics (sulodexide, 1 trial), calcium channel blockers (amlodipine, 1 trial) and lipid-modifying drugs (atorvastatin, 1 trial).
CONCLUSION
Moderate- to high-certainty RCT evidence suggests that cardiovascular drugs such as ACEIs/ARBs are not associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes, and should therefore not be discontinued. These cardiovascular drugs should also not be initiated to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless they are needed for an underlying currently approved therapeutic indication.
Topics: Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Antihypertensive Agents; Cardiovascular Agents; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 35322889
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15331 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2014Rosuvastatin is one of the most potent statins and is currently widely prescribed. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of rosuvastatin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Rosuvastatin is one of the most potent statins and is currently widely prescribed. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of rosuvastatin on blood lipids.
OBJECTIVES
Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of rosuvastatin on serum total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, non-HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides in participants with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease. Secondary objectives To quantify the variability of the effect of various doses of rosuvastatin.To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in the randomized placebo-controlled trials.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 10 of 12, 2014 in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to October week 5 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 2014 week 44), Web of Science Core Collection (1970 to 5 November 2014) and BIOSIS Citation Index (1969 to 31 October 2014). No language restrictions were applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of rosuvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included and extracted data. WDAEs information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials.
MAIN RESULTS
One-hundred and eight trials (18 placebo-controlled and 90 before-and-after) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of rosuvastatin in 19,596 participants. Rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg/day caused LDL-cholesterol decreases of 46% to 55%, when all the trials were combined using the generic inverse variance method. The quality of evidence for these effects is high. Log dose-response data over doses of 1 to 80 mg, revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol. When compared to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin was about three-fold more potent at reducing LDL-cholesterol. There was no dose-related effect of rosuvastatin on blood HDL-cholesterol, but overall, rosuvastatin increased HDL by 7%. There is a high risk of bias for the trials in this review, which would affect WDAEs, but unlikely to affect the lipid measurements. WDAEs were not statistically different between rosuvastatin and placebo in 10 of 18 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 0.84; 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.47).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The total blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of rosuvastatin was linearly dependent on dose. Rosuvastatin log dose-response data were linear over the commonly prescribed dose range. Based on an informal comparison with atorvastatin, this represents a three-fold greater potency. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with rosuvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 44% of the placebo-controlled trials.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol; Cholesterol, HDL; Cholesterol, LDL; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedule; Fluorobenzenes; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Hyperlipidemias; Lipids; Pyrimidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rosuvastatin Calcium; Sulfonamides; Triglycerides
PubMed: 25415541
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010254.pub2 -
Revista Medica Del Instituto Mexicano... Oct 2023Atorvastatin has been used in the management of dyslipidemia and little is known about the efficacy and safety of high-dose atorvastatin administration for secondary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Atorvastatin has been used in the management of dyslipidemia and little is known about the efficacy and safety of high-dose atorvastatin administration for secondary prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events (MACE).
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the impact of high-dose atorvastatin on secondary prevention of MACE and adverse events.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of Pubmed, Embase, Bireme and Cochrane Library Plus databases was performed, with a time scope from 1990 to July 2022. Six randomized clinical trials were included with a total of 29,333 patients who were treated with 80 mg, 10 mg or placebo doses of Atorvastatin where the main outcomes evaluated were Major Cardiovascular Events (MACE), mortality and treatment safety.
RESULTS
In the comparative study between the use of Atorvastatin 80 mg and other therapies, a relative risk (RR) of 0.8 (95%CI 0.69-0.92) was found, representing a 20% reduction in risk (RRR) and a number needed to treat (NNT) of 30-55. In the analysis of adverse effects, an RR of 2.37 (95% CI 0.86-6.53) and a number needed to harm (NNH) of 14-19 were observed. The use of 80 mg atorvastatin is associated with similar adverse events at lower doses.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of atorvastatin 80 mg is effective in the secondary prevention of Major Cardiovascular Event (MACE). The drug has adverse events that should be taken into account in secondary prevention.
Topics: Humans; Atorvastatin; Cardiovascular Diseases
PubMed: 37934798
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8319748 -
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology May 2016The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of statin therapy on plasma FFA concentrations in a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of statin therapy on plasma FFA concentrations in a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials.
METHODS
PubMed-Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases were searched (from inception to February 16 2015) to identify controlled trials evaluating the impact of statins on plasma FFA concentrations. A systematic assessment of bias in the included studies was performed using the Cochrane criteria. A random effects model and generic inverse variance method were used for quantitative data synthesis. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using the leave-one-out method. Random effects meta-regression was performed using unrestricted maximum likelihood method to evaluate the impact of potential moderators.
RESULTS
Meta-analysis of data from 14 treatment arms indicated a significant reduction in plasma FFA concentrations following treatment with statins (weighted mean difference (WMD) -19.42%, 95% CI -23.19, --15.64, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis confirmed the significance of the effect with both atorvastatin (WMD -20.56%, 95% CI -24.51, -16.61, P < 0.01) and simvastatin (WMD -18.05%, 95% CI -28.12, -7.99, P < 0.001). Changes in plasma FFA concentrations were independent of treatment duration (slope -0.10, 95% CI -0.30, 0.11, P = 0.354) and magnitude of reduction in plasma low density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations (slope 0.55, 95% CI -0.17, 1.27, P = 0.133) by statins.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the present study suggest that statin therapy may lower plasma FFA concentrations. The cardiovascular and metabolic significance of this finding requires further investigation.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Cholesterol, LDL; Fatty Acids, Nonesterified; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26624855
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.12854 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2014The use of statin therapy in established Alzheimer's disease (AD) or vascular dementia (VaD) is a relatively unexplored area. In AD, β-amyloid protein (Aβ) is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The use of statin therapy in established Alzheimer's disease (AD) or vascular dementia (VaD) is a relatively unexplored area. In AD, β-amyloid protein (Aβ) is deposited in the form of extracellular plaques and previous studies have determined Aβ generation is cholesterol dependent. Hypercholesterolaemia has also been implicated in the pathogenesis of VaD. Due to the role of statins in cholesterol reduction, it is biologically plausible they may be efficacious in the treatment of AD and VaD.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of statins in the treatment of AD and VaD. To evaluate if the efficacy of statins in the treatment of AD and VaD depends on cholesterol level, ApoE genotype or cognitive level.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and LILACS, as well as many trials registries and grey literature sources (20 January 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Double-blind, randomised controlled trials of statins given for at least six months in people with a diagnosis of dementia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two independent authors extracted and assessed data against the inclusion criteria. We pooled data where appropriate and entered them into a meta-analysis. We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified four studies (1154 participants, age range 50 to 90 years). All participants had a diagnosis of probable or possible AD according to standard criteria and most participants were established on a cholinesterase inhibitor. The primary outcome in all studies was change in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) from baseline. When we pooled data, there was no significant benefit from statin (mean difference -0.26, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.05 to 0.52, P value = 0.51). All studies provided change in Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) from baseline. There was no significant benefit from statins in MMSE when we pooled the data (mean difference -0.32, 95% CI -0.71 to 0.06, P value = 0.10). Three studies reported treatment-related adverse effects. When we pooled data, there was no significant difference between statins and placebo (odds ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.06, P value = 0.78). There was no significant difference in behaviour, global function or activities of daily living in the statin and placebo groups. We assessed risk of bias as low for all studies. We found no studies assessing role of statins in treatment of VaD.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Analyses from the studies available, including two large randomised controlled trials, indicate that statins have no benefit on the primary outcome measures of ADAS-Cog or MMSE.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alzheimer Disease; Atorvastatin; Dementia; Heptanoic Acids; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Middle Aged; Pyrroles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Simvastatin
PubMed: 25004278
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007514.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2021Statins are one of the most prescribed classes of drugs worldwide. Atorvastatin, the most prescribed statin, is currently used to treat conditions such as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Statins are one of the most prescribed classes of drugs worldwide. Atorvastatin, the most prescribed statin, is currently used to treat conditions such as hypercholesterolaemia and dyslipidaemia. By reducing the level of cholesterol, which is the precursor of the steroidogenesis pathway, atorvastatin may cause a reduction in levels of testosterone and other androgens. Testosterone and other androgens play important roles in biological functions. A potential reduction in androgen levels, caused by atorvastatin might cause negative effects in most settings. In contrast, in the setting of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), reducing excessive levels of androgens with atorvastatin could be beneficial.
OBJECTIVES
Primary objective To quantify the magnitude of the effect of atorvastatin on total testosterone in both males and females, compared to placebo or no treatment. Secondary objectives To quantify the magnitude of the effects of atorvastatin on free testosterone, sex hormone binding globin (SHBG), androstenedione, dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate (DHEAS) concentrations, free androgen index (FAI), and withdrawal due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in both males and females, compared to placebo or no treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to 9 November 2020: the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase; ;two international trials registries, and the websites of the US Food and Drug Administration, the European Patent Office and the Pfizer pharmaceutical corporation. These searches had no language restrictions. We also contacted authors of relevant articles regarding further published and unpublished work.
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs of daily atorvastatin for at least three weeks, compared with placebo or no treatment, and assessing change in testosterone levels in males or females.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the citations, extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. We used the mean difference (MD) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) to report the effect size of continuous outcomes,and the risk ratio (RR) to report effect sizes of the sole dichotomous outcome (WDAEs). We used a fixed-effect meta-analytic model to combine effect estimates across studies, and risk ratio to report effect size of the dichotomous outcomes. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six RCTs involving 265 participants who completed the study and their data was reported. Participants in two of the studies were male with normal lipid profile or mild dyslipidaemia (N = 140); the mean age of participants was 68 years. Participants in four of the studies were female with PCOS (N = 125); the mean age of participants was 32 years. We found no significant difference in testosterone levels in males between atorvastatin and placebo, MD -0.20 nmol/L (95% CI -0.77 to 0.37). In females, atorvastatin may reduce total testosterone by -0.27 nmol/L (95% CI -0.50 to -0.04), FAI by -2.59 nmol/L (95% CI -3.62 to -1.57), androstenedione by -1.37 nmol/L (95% CI -2.26 to -0.49), and DHEAS by -0.63 μmol/l (95% CI -1.12 to -0.15). Furthermore, compared to placebo, atorvastatin increased SHBG concentrations in females by 3.11 nmol/L (95% CI 0.23 to 5.99). We identified no studies in healthy females (i.e. females with normal testosterone levels) or children (under age 18). Importantly, no study reported on free testosterone levels.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no significant difference between atorvastatin and placebo on the levels of total testosterone in males. In females with PCOS, atorvastatin lowered the total testosterone, FAI, androstenedione, and DHEAS. The certainty of evidence ranged from low to very low for both comparisons. More RCTs studying the effect of atorvastatin on testosterone are needed.
Topics: Aged; Androgens; Androstenedione; Atorvastatin; Bias; Dehydroepiandrosterone Sulfate; Female; Humans; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Male; Placebos; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sex Factors; Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin; Testosterone
PubMed: 33482034
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013211.pub2