Potential impact of blood cholesterol guidelines on statin treatment in the U.S. population using interrupted time series analysis.

BACKGROUND: The 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline was a paradigm shift in lipid management and identified the four statin-benefit groups. Many have studied the guideline's potential impact, but few have investigated its potential long-term impact on MACE. Furthermore, most studies also ignored the confounding effect from the earlier release of generic atorvastatin in Dec 2011. METHODS: To evaluate the potential (long-term) impact of the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline release in Nov 2013 in the U.S., we investigated the association of the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline with the trend changes in 5-Year MACE survival and three other statin-related outcomes (statin use, optimal statin use, and statin adherence) while controlling for generic atorvastatin availability using interrupted time series analysis, called the Chow's test. Specifically, we conducted a retrospective study using U.S. nationwide de-identified claims and electronic health records from Optum Labs Database Warehouse (OLDW) to follow the trends of 5-Year MACE survival and statin-related outcomes among four statin-benefit groups that were identified in the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline. Then, Chow's test was used to discern trend changes between generic atorvastatin availability and guideline potential impact. RESULTS: 197,021 patients were included (ASCVD: 19,060; High-LDL: 33,907; Diabetes: 138,159; High-ASCVD-Risk: 5,895). After the guideline release, the long-term trend (slope) of 5-Year MACE Survival for the Diabetes group improved significantly (P = 0.002). Optimal statin use for the ASCVD group also showed immediate improvement (intercept) and long-term positive changes (slope) after the release (P < 0.001). Statin uses did not have significant trend changes and statin adherence remained unchanged in all statin-benefit groups. Although no other statistically significant trend changes were found, overall positive trend change or no changes were observed after the 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline release. CONCLUSIONS: The 2013 ACA/AHA Guideline release is associated with trend improvements in the long-term MACE Survival for Diabetes group and optimal statin use for ASCVD group. These significant associations might indicate a potential positive long-term impact of the 2013 ACA/AHA Guideline on better health outcomes for primary prevention groups and an immediate potential impact on statin prescribing behaviors in higher-at-risk groups. However, further investigation is required to confirm the causal effect of the 2013 ACA/AHA Guideline.

Causal association between lipid-lowering drugs and cancers: A drug target Mendelian randomization study.

Accumulating evidences have indicated that lipid-lowering drugs have effect for the treatment of cancers. However, causal associations between lipid-lowering drugs and the risk of cancers are still unclear. In our study, we utilized single nucleotide polymorphisms of proprotein convertase subtilis kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-assisted enzyme A reductase (HMGCR) inhibitors and performed a drug target Mendelian randomization to explore the causal association between lipid-lowering drugs and the risk of cancers. Five regression methods were carried out, including inverse variance weighted (IVW) method, MR Egger, weighted median, simple mode and weighted mode methods, of which IVW method was considered as the main analysis. Our outcome dataset contained the risk of breast cancer (BC), colorectal cancer, endometrial cancer, gastric cancer (GC), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), lung cancer, esophageal cancer, prostate cancer (PC), and skin cancer (SC). Our results demonstrated that PCSK9 inhibitors were significant associated with a decreased effect of GC [IVW: OR = 0.482, 95% CI: 0.264-0.879, P = .017]. Besides, genetic inhibitions of HMGCR were significant correlated with an increased effect of BC [IVW: OR = 1.421, 95% CI: 1.056-1.911, P = .020], PC [IVW: OR = 1.617, 95% CI: 1.234-2.120, P = .0005] and SC [IVW: OR = 1.266, 95% CI: 1.022-1.569, P = .031]. For GC [IVW: OR = 0.559, 95% CI: 0.382-0.820, P = .0029] and HCC [IVW: OR = 0.241, 95% CI: 0.085-0.686, P = .0077], HMGCR inhibitors had a protective risk. Our method suggested that PCSK9 inhibitors were significant associated with a protective effect of GC. Genetic inhibitions of HMGCR were significant correlated with an increased effect of BC, PC and SC. Meanwhile, HMGCR inhibitors had a protective risk of GC and HCC. Subsequent studies still needed to assess potential effects between lipid-lowering drugs and the risk of cancers with clinical trials.

Mortality and adverse events associated with statin use in primary care patients with depression: a real-world, population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: New National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance endorses the prescription of statins in larger population groups for the prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality, especially in people with severe mental illness. However, the evidence base for their safety and risk/benefit balance in depression is not established. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the real-world mortality and adverse events of statins in depressive disorders. METHODS: Population-based, nationwide (England), between-subject, cohort study. We used electronic health records (QResearch database) of people aged 18-100 years with first-episode depression, registered with English primary care practices over January 1998-August 2020 for 12(+) months, divided into statin users versus non-users.Primary safety outcomes included all-cause mortality and any adverse event measured at 2, 6 and 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to control for several potential confounders and calculate adjusted ORs (aORs) with 99% CIs. FINDINGS: From over 1 050 105 patients with depression (42.64% males, mean age 43.23±18.32 years), 21 384 (2.04%) died, while 707 111 (67.34%) experienced at least one adverse event during the 12-month follow-up. Statin use was associated with lower mortality over 12 months (range aOR2-12months 0.66-0.67, range 99% CI 0.60 to 0.73) and with lower adverse events over 6 months (range aOR2-6months 0.90-0.96, range 99% CI 0.91 to 0.99), but not at 1 year (aOR12months 0.99, 99% CI 0.96 to 1.03). No association with any other individual outcome measure (ie, any other neuropsychiatric symptoms) was identified. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that statin use among people with depression increases mortality or other adverse events. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our findings support the safety of updated NICE guidelines for prescribing statins in people with depressive disorders.

Association between Statin Use and Chemotherapy-Induced Cardiotoxicity: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: Chemotherapy-induced cardiac dysfunction (CIC) is a significant and concerning complication observed among cancer patients. Despite the demonstrated cardioprotective benefits of statins in various cardiovascular diseases, their effectiveness in mitigating CIC remains uncertain. Objective: This meta-analysis aims to comprehensively evaluate the potential cardioprotective role of statins in patients with CIC. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases to identify relevant articles published from inception until 10th May 2023. The outcomes were assessed using pooled odds ratio (OR) for categorical data and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Results: This meta-analysis comprised nine studies involving a total of 5532 patients, with 1904 in the statin group and 3628 in the non-statin group. The pooled analysis of primary outcome shows that patients who did not receive statin suffer a greater decline in the LVEF after chemotherapy compared to those who receive statin (MD, 3.55 (95% CI: 1.04-6.05), p = 0.01). Likewise, we observed a significantly higher final mean LVEF among chemotherapy patients with statin compared to the non-statin group of patients (MD, 2.08 (95% CI: 0.86-3.30), p > 0.001). Additionally, there was a lower risk of incident heart failure in the statin group compared to the non-statin group of patients (OR, 0.41 (95% CI: 0.27-0.62), p < 0.001). Lastly, the change in the mean difference for LVEDV was not statistically significant between the statin and non-statin groups (MD, 1.55 (95% CI: -5.22-8.33), p = 0.65). Conclusion: Among patients of CIC, statin use has shown cardioprotective benefits by improving left ventricular function and reducing the risk of heart failure.

Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Low/Moderate-Intensity Statin plus Ezetimibe Combination Therapy vs. High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: An Updated Meta-Analysis.

AIM: Statin therapy is considered the gold standard for treating hypercholesterolemia. This updated meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of a low/moderate-intensity statin in combination with ezetimibe compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS: A systematic search of two databases (PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL) was conducted from inception to January 2023 and a total of 21 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were identified and included in the analysis. Data were pooled using Hedges's g and a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to derive standard mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (Cis). The primary outcome studied was the effect of these treatments on lipid parameters and safety events. RESULTS: The results revealed that combination therapy was more effective in reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (SMD= - 0.41; CI - 0.63 to - 0.19; P = 0.0002). There was no significant change in the levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), Apo A1, or Apo B. The safety of these treatments was assessed by the following markers alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and creatine phosphokinase (CK), and a significant difference was only observed in CK (SMD: - 0.81; CI - 1.52 to - 0.10; P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated that the use of low/moderate-intensity statin combination therapy significantly reduced LDL-C levels compared with high-intensity statin monotherapy, making it preferable for patients with related risks. However, further trials are encouraged to evaluate potential adverse effects associated with combined therapy.

Low-dose colchicine for atherosclerosis: long-term safety.

Low-dose colchicine (0.5 mg daily) is now FDA-approved for secondary prevention in patients with coronary disease and will be increasingly prescribed in clinical practice. In this State-of-the-Art Review, data were collated from contemporary systemic reviews of case reports, drug registries, and placebo-controlled trials that assessed specific issues of safety related to the continuous use of colchicine in a range of clinical settings to inform physicians, pharmacists, and patients of the absolute risks of continuous use of low-dose colchicine, including among individuals taking statin therapy. Based upon these collective data, it is concluded that aside mild diarrhoea on initiation of colchicine that typically subsides in the vast majority of patients within a week of therapy, continuous use of low-dose colchicine is well tolerated and very safe. It does not affect renal, liver, or cognitive function, has no adverse effects on bleeding, wound healing, fertility, or pregnancy, and does not increase risks of cancer, serious infection, or cause-specific mortality. When appropriately prescribed to patients without significant renal or hepatic impairment, reports of myelosuppression, myotoxicity, and serious drug-drug interactions are rare and no more frequent than placebo, including in patients taking statin therapy. Physicians, pharmacists, and patients can be reassured that in the absence of significant renal or hepatic impairment continuous use of low-dose colchicine can be used safely in patients with atherosclerosis for the purpose of reducing cardiovascular risk.

Association of Use and Dose of Lipid-Lowering Therapy Post Acute Myocardial Infarction With 5-Year Survival in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Older people are underrepresented in randomized trials. The association between lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and its intensity after acute myocardial infarction and long-term mortality in this population deserves to be assessed. METHODS: The FAST-MI (French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) program consists of nationwide French surveys including all patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction ≤48 hours from onset over a 1- to 2-month period in 2005, 2010, and 2015, with long-term follow-up. Numerous data were collected and a centralized 10-year follow-up was organized. The present analysis focused on the association between prescription of LLT (atorvastatin ≥40 mg or equivalent, or any combination of statin and ezetimibe) and 5-year mortality in patients aged ≥80 years discharged alive. Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching were used to adjust for baseline differences. RESULTS: Among the 2258 patients aged ≥80 years (mean age, 85±4 years; 51% women; 39% ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 58% with percutaneous coronary intervention), 415 were discharged without LLT (18%), 866 with conventional doses (38%), and 977 with high-dose LLT (43%). Five-year survival was 36%, 47.5%, and 58%, respectively. Compared with patients without LLT, high-dose LLT was significantly associated with lower 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.66-0.92]), whereas conventional-intensity LLT was not (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.80-1.09]). In propensity score-matched cohorts (n=278 receiving high-intensity LLT and n=278 receiving no statins), 5-year survival was 52% with high-intensity LLT at discharge and 42% without statins (hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.62-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS: In these observational cohorts, high-intensity LLT at discharge after acute myocardial infarction was associated with reduced all-cause mortality at 5 years in an older adult population. These results suggest that high-intensity LLT should not be denied to patients on the basis of old age. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00673036, NCT01237418, and NCT02566200.

Pragmatic Trial of Messaging to Providers About Treatment of Hyperlipidemia (PROMPT-LIPID): A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) is underutilized for very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. PROMPT-LIPID (PRagmatic Trial of Messaging to Providers about Treatment of HyperLIPIDemia) sought to determine whether electronic health record (EHR) alerts improve 90-day LLT intensification in patients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. METHODS: PROMPT-LIPID was a pragmatic trial in which cardiovascular and internal medicine clinicians within Yale New Haven Health (New Haven, CT) were cluster-randomized to receive an EHR alert with individualized LLT recommendations or no alert for outpatients with very high-risk atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), ≥70 mg/dL. The primary outcome was 90-day LLT intensification (change to high-intensity statin and addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9i [proprotein subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors]). Secondary outcomes included LDL-C level, proportion of patients with LDL-C of <70 or < 55 mg/dL, rate of major adverse cardiovascular events, ED visit incidence, and 6-month mortality. Results were analyzed using logistic and linear regression clustered at the provider level. RESULTS: The no-alert group included 47 clinicians and 1370 patients (median age, 71 years; 50.1% female, median LDL-C, 93 mg/dL); the alert group included 49 clinicians and 1130 patients (median age, 72 years; 47% female, median LDL-C 91, mg/dL). The primary outcome was observed in 14.1% of patients in the alert group as compared with 10.4% in the no-alert group. There were no differences in any secondary outcomes at 6 months. Among 542 patients whose clinicians (n=46) did not dismiss the EHR alert recommendations, LLT intensification was significantly greater (21.2% versus 10.4%, odds ratio, 2.33 [95% CI, 1.48-3.66]). CONCLUSIONS: With a real-time, targeted, individualized EHR alert as compared with usual care, the proportion of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with LLT intensification was numerically higher but not statistically significant. Among clinicians who did not dismiss the alert, there was a > 2-fold increase in LLT intensification. EHR alerts, coupled with strategies to reduce clinician dismissal, may help address persistent gaps in LDL-C management. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04394715, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04394715.

Association between statin use and the risk for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and its prognosis: a nationwide, population-based study.

Given the pleiotropic effects of statins beyond their lipid-lowering effects, there have been attempts to evaluate the role of statin therapy in IPF, but they have shown inconclusive results. Data from the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database of South Korea were used to investigate the effects of statin therapy on IPF. The IPF cohort consisted of a total of 10,568 patients who were newly diagnosed with IPF between 2010 and 2017. These patients were then matched in a 1:3 ratio to 31,704 subjects from a control cohort without IPF, with matching based on age and sex. A case-control study was performed to evaluate the association between statin use and the risk for IPF, and the multivariable analysis revealed that statin use was associated with a lower risk for IPF (adjusted OR 0.847, 95% CI 0.800-0.898). Using the IPF cohort, we also evaluated whether statin use at the time of diagnosis was associated with future clinical outcomes. The statin use at the time of IPF diagnosis was associated with improved overall survival (adjusted HR 0.779, 95% CI 0.709-0.856). Further prospective studies are needed to clarify the role of statin therapy in IPF.

Assessing the causal associations of different types of statins use and knee/hip osteoarthritis: A Mendelian randomization study.

OBJECTIVE: This study comprehensively evaluated the causal relationship between different types of statins use and knee/hip osteoarthritis (OA) using a two-sample and multivariate Mendelian randomization (MR) method. METHODS: MR analysis was conducted using publicly available summary statistics data from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to assess the causal associations between total statins use (including specific types) and knee/hip OA. The primary analysis utilized the inverse variance-weighted (IVW) method, with sensitivity analysis conducted to assess robustness. Multivariable MR (MVMR) analysis adjusted for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), intermediate-density lipoprotein cholesterol (IDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: The MR analysis revealed a significant inverse association between genetically predicted total statins use and the risk of knee OA (OR = 0.950, 95%CI: 0.920-0.982, p = 0.002) as well as hip OA (OR = 0.932, 95%CI: 0.899-0.966, p <0.001). Furthermore, this study highlighted a reduced risk of knee/hip OA with the use of atorvastatin and simvastatin. Rosuvastatin use was associated with a decreased risk of hip OA but showed no association with knee OA. MVMR results indicated no correlation between exposure factors and outcomes after adjusting for LDL-C or IDL-C. HDL-C may not significantly contribute to statin-induced osteoarthritis, while BMI may play an important role. CONCLUSION: This study provides compelling evidence of the close relationship between statin use and a reduced risk of knee/hip OA, particularly with atorvastatin and simvastatin. LDL-C and IDL-C may mediate these effects. These findings have important implications for the clinical prevention and treatment of knee/hip OA.

In higher-risk, statin-intolerant adults with diabetes, bempedoic acid reduced MACE at a median 3 y.

SOURCE CITATION: Ray KK, Nicholls SJ, Li N, et al; CLEAR OUTCOMES Committees and Investigators. Efficacy and safety of bempedoic acid among patients with and without diabetes: prespecified analysis of the CLEAR Outcomes randomised trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2024;12:19-28. 38061370.

Association between Lipid-Lowering Drugs and Traumatic Subdural Hemorrhage: A Mendelian Randomization Study.

BACKGROUND: There are current clinical observations that atorvastatin may promote subdural hematoma resorption. We aimed to assess the causal effects of lipid-lowering agents 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase (HMGCR) inhibitors, Proproteinconvertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors and Niemann-Pick C1-like protein 1 (NPC1L1) inhibitors on traumatic subdural hematomas. METHODS: We used genetic instruments to proxy lipid-lowering drug exposure, with genetic instruments being genetic variants within or near low-density lipoprotein (LDL cholesterol)-associated drug target genes. These were analyzed by using a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study. RESULTS: A causal relationship was found between HMGCR inhibitors and traumatic subdural hematoma (Inverse variance weighted (ß = -0.7593341 (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.4679779), p = 0.008366947 < 0.05)). However, no causal relationship was found between PCSK9 inhibitors and NPC1L1 inhibitors and traumatic subdural hematoma (PCSK9 inhibitors: Inverse variance weighted (ß = 0.23897796 (OR = 1.2699505), p = 0.1126327), NPC1L1 inhibitors: Inverse variance weighted (ß = -0.02118558 (OR = 0.9790373), p = 0.9701686)). Sensitivity analysis of the data revealed good stability of the results. CONCLUSIONS: This two-sample MR study suggests a potential causal relationship between HMGCR inhibition (atorvastatin) and traumatic subdural hemorrhage.

Predicted deleterious variants in ABCA1, LPL, LPA and KIF6 are associated with statin response and adverse events in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia and disturb protein structure and stability.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored the association of deleterious variants in pharmacodynamics (PD) genes with statin response and adverse effects in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and analyzed their potential effects on protein structure and stability. METHODS: Clinical and laboratory data were obtained from 144 adult FH patients treated with statins. A panel of 32 PD genes was analyzed by exon-targeted gene sequencing. Deleterious variants were identified using prediction algorithms and their structural effects were analyzed by molecular modeling studies. RESULTS: A total of 102 variants were predicted as deleterious (83 missense, 8 stop-gain, 4 frameshift, 1 indel, 6 splicing). The variants ABCA1 rs769705621 (indel), LPA rs41267807 (p.Tyr2023Cys) and KIF6 rs20455 (p.Trp719Arg) were associated with reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc) response to statins, and the LPL rs1801177 (p.Asp36Asn) with increased LDLc response (P < 0.05). LPA rs3124784 (p.Arg2016Cys) was predicted to increase statin response (P = 0.022), and ABCA1 rs769705621 to increase the risk of statin-related adverse events (SRAE) (P = 0.027). LPA p.Arg2016Cys and LPL p.Asn36Asp maintained interactions with solvent, LPA p.Tyr2023Cys reduced intramolecular interaction with Gln1987, and KIF6 p.Trp719Arg did not affect intramolecular interactions. DDMut analysis showed that LPA p.Arg2016Cys and p.Tyr2023Cys and LPL p.Asp36Asn caused energetically favorable changes, and KIF6 p.Trp719Arg resulted in unfavorable energetic changes, affecting protein stability. CONCLUSION: Deleterious variants in ABCA1, LPA, LPL and KIF6 are associated with variability in LDLc response to statins, and ABCA1 rs769705621 is associated with SRAE risk in FH patients. Molecular modeling studies suggest that LPA p.Tyr2023Cys and KIF6 p.Trp719Arg disturb protein conformational structure and stability.

SLCO1B1 Exome Sequencing and Statin Treatment Response in 64,000 UK Biobank Patients.

The solute carrier organic anion transporter family member 1B1 (SLCO1B1) encodes the organic anion-transporting polypeptide 1B1 (OATP1B1 protein) that transports statins to liver cells. Common genetic variants in SLCO1B1, such as *5, cause altered systemic exposure to statins and therefore affect statin outcomes, with potential pharmacogenetic applications; yet, evidence is inconclusive. We studied common and rare SLCO1B1 variants in up to 64,000 patients from UK Biobank prescribed simvastatin or atorvastatin, combining whole-exome sequencing data with up to 25-year routine clinical records. We studied 51 predicted gain/loss-of-function variants affecting OATP1B1. Both SLCO1B1*5 alone and the SLCO1B1*15 haplotype increased LDL during treatment (beta*5 = 0.08 mmol/L, p = 6 × 10-8; beta*15 = 0.03 mmol/L, p = 3 × 10-4), as did the likelihood of discontinuing statin prescriptions (hazard ratio*5 = 1.12, p = 0.04; HR*15 = 1.05, p = 0.04). SLCO1B1*15 and SLCO1B1*20 increased the risk of General Practice (GP)-diagnosed muscle symptoms (HR*15 = 1.22, p = 0.003; HR*20 = 1.25, p = 0.01). We estimated that genotype-guided prescribing could potentially prevent 18% and 10% of GP-diagnosed muscle symptoms experienced by statin patients, with *15 and *20, respectively. The remaining common variants were not individually significant. Rare variants in SLCO1B1 increased LDL in statin users by up to 1.05 mmol/L, but replication is needed. We conclude that genotype-guided treatment could reduce GP-diagnosed muscle symptoms in statin patients; incorporating further SLCO1B1 variants into clinical prediction scores could improve LDL control and decrease adverse events, including discontinuation.

Effects of statin therapy on diagnoses of new-onset diabetes and worsening glycaemia in large-scale randomised blinded statin trials: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analyses of summary data from randomised controlled trials have shown that statin therapy increases the risk of diabetes, but less is known about the size or timing of this effect, or who is at greatest risk. We aimed to address these gaps in knowledge through analysis of individual participant data from large, long-term, randomised, double-blind trials of statin therapy. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised controlled trials of statin therapy that participated in the CTT Collaboration. All double-blind randomised controlled trials of statin therapy of at least 2 years' scheduled duration and with at least 1000 participants were eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis. All recorded diabetes-related adverse events, treatments, and measures of glycaemia were sought from eligible trials. Meta-analyses assessed the effects of allocation to statin therapy on new-onset diabetes (defined by diabetes-related adverse events, use of new glucose-lowering medications, glucose concentrations, or HbA1c values) and on worsening glycaemia in people with diabetes (defined by complications of glucose control, increased use of glucose-lowering medication, or HbA1c increase of ≥0·5%). Standard inverse-variance-weighted meta-analyses of the effects on these outcomes were conducted according to a prespecified protocol. FINDINGS: Of the trials participating in the CTT Collaboration, 19 trials compared statin versus placebo (123 940 participants, 25 701 [21%] with diabetes; median follow-up of 4·3 years), and four trials compared more versus less intensive statin therapy (30 724 participants, 5340 [17%] with diabetes, median follow-up of 4·9 years). Compared with placebo, allocation to low-intensity or moderate-intensity statin therapy resulted in a 10% proportional increase in new-onset diabetes (2420 of 39 179 participants assigned to receive a statin [1·3% per year] vs 2214 of 39 266 participants assigned to receive placebo [1·2% per year]; rate ratio [RR] 1·10, 95% CI 1·04-1·16), and allocation to high-intensity statin therapy resulted in a 36% proportional increase (1221 of 9935 participants assigned to receive a statin [4·8% per year] vs 905 of 9859 participants assigned to receive placebo [3·5% per year]; 1·36, 1·25-1·48). For each trial, the rate of new-onset diabetes among participants allocated to receive placebo depended mostly on the proportion of participants who had at least one follow-up HbA1c measurement; this proportion was much higher in the high-intensity than the low-intensity or moderate-intensity trials. Consequently, the main determinant of the magnitude of the absolute excesses in the two types of trial was the extent of HbA1c measurement rather than the proportional increase in risk associated with statin therapy. In participants without baseline diabetes, mean glucose increased by 0·04 mmol/L with both low-intensity or moderate-intensity (95% CI 0·03-0·05) and high-intensity statins (0·02-0·06), and mean HbA1c increased by 0·06% (0·00-0·12) with low-intensity or moderate-intensity statins and 0·08% (0·07-0·09) with high-intensity statins. Among those with a baseline measure of glycaemia, approximately 62% of new-onset diabetes cases were among participants who were already in the top quarter of the baseline distribution. The relative effects of statin therapy on new-onset diabetes were similar among different types of participants and over time. Among participants with baseline diabetes, the RRs for worsening glycaemia were 1·10 (1·06-1·14) for low-intensity or moderate-intensity statin therapy and 1·24 (1·06-1·44) for high-intensity statin therapy compared with placebo. INTERPRETATION: Statins cause a moderate dose-dependent increase in new diagnoses of diabetes that is consistent with a small upwards shift in glycaemia, with the majority of new diagnoses of diabetes occurring in people with baseline glycaemic markers that are close to the diagnostic threshold for diabetes. Importantly, however, any theoretical adverse effects of statins on cardiovascular risk that might arise from these small increases in glycaemia (or, indeed, from any other mechanism) are already accounted for in the overall reduction in cardiovascular risk that is seen with statin therapy in these trials. These findings should further inform clinical guidelines regarding clinical management of people taking statin therapy. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Statin Therapy for Secondary Prevention in Ischemic Stroke Patients With Cerebral Microbleeds.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The association between statin use and the risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICrH) following ischemic stroke (IS) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) in patients with cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) remains uncertain. This study investigated the risk of recurrent IS and ICrH in patients receiving statins based on the presence of CMBs. METHODS: We conducted a pooled analysis of individual patient data from the Microbleeds International Collaborative Network, comprising 32 hospital-based prospective studies fulfilling the following criteria: adult patients with IS or TIA, availability of appropriate baseline MRI for CMB quantification and distribution, registration of statin use after the index stroke, and collection of stroke event data during a follow-up period of ≥3 months. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of recurrent symptomatic stroke (IS or ICrH), while secondary endpoints included IS alone or ICrH alone. We calculated incidence rates and performed Cox regression analyses adjusting for age, sex, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, previous stroke, and use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant drugs to explore the association between statin use and stroke events during follow-up in patients with CMBs. RESULTS: In total, 16,373 patients were included (mean age 70.5 ± 12.8 years; 42.5% female). Among them, 10,812 received statins at discharge, and 4,668 had 1 or more CMBs. The median follow-up duration was 1.34 years (interquartile range: 0.32-2.44). In patients with CMBs, statin users were compared with nonusers. Compared with nonusers, statin therapy was associated with a reduced risk of any stroke (incidence rate [IR] 53 vs 79 per 1,000 patient-years, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.68 [95% CI 0.56-0.84]), a reduced risk of IS (IR 39 vs 65 per 1,000 patient-years, aHR 0.65 [95% CI 0.51-0.82]), and no association with the risk of ICrH (IR 11 vs 16 per 1,000 patient-years, aHR 0.73 [95% CI 0.46-1.15]). The results in aHR remained consistent when considering anatomical distribution and high burden (≥5) of CMBs. DISCUSSION: These observational data suggest that secondary stroke prevention with statins in patients with IS or TIA and CMBs is associated with a lower risk of any stroke or IS without an increased risk of ICrH. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that for patients with IS or TIA and CMBs, statins lower the risk of any stroke or IS without increasing the risk of ICrH.

Utilizing Pharmacogenomics Results to Improve Statin-Associated Muscle Symptoms.

The objective of this aims to demonstrate the advantage of a pharmacogenomics (PGx)-informed medication review in mitigating adverse drug events (ADEs) and optimizing therapeutic outcomes. PGx testing and PGx-informed medication reviews assist in mitigating ADEs. PGx testing was performed on a 68-year-old male presenting with uncontrolled chronic pain. The PGx results highlighted a drug-gene interaction, aiding in identification of the increased risk of statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS) attributing to uncontrolled chronic pain. This patient case report illustrates how incorporating PGx results can help improve chronic pain and mitigate ADEs, such as SAMS.