Statin therapy for prevention and treatment of acute and chronic cardiovascular disease: update on recent trials and metaanalyses

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize the evidence from recent clinical trials and metaanalyses on the efficacy of statin therapy to reduce death, myocardial infarction and stroke, and to review the effects of statins in patients with low LDL cholesterol, diabetes, end-stage renal disease, and acute coronary syndrome. RECENT FINDINGS: In large metaanalyses of randomized controlled trials relative risk reductions from statins compared with placebo for patients with manifest or with risk factors for coronary artery disease were 13% for overall mortality, 26% for fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction, and 18% for fatal and nonfatal stroke. Evidence from large trials suggests that patients with type II diabetes compared with patients without diabetes have similar risk reductions from statins for cardiovascular events, but this benefit is not seen in patients with diabetes and end-stage renal disease. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, early treatment with high-dose atorvastatin reduces cardiovascular morbidity after the first 4 months following the event, but the impact on mortality endpoints remains less clear. Results from recent trials in patients with stable coronary artery disease or type II diabetes suggest that statins provide benefit at considerable low LDL cholesterol levels. Therefore, target values for LDL cholesterol of less than 1.8 mmol/l (<70 mg/dl) should be considered for all patients with coronary artery disease or equivalent coronary risk. SUMMARY: For patients at high risk of coronary artery disease there is growing evidence for the concept of 'the lower, the better' regarding LDL cholesterol levels. Ongoing trials are further investigating the safety of lower target values in patients at various risk of coronary artery disease.     

Efficacy of Standard and Intensive Statin Treatment for the Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Events in Diabetes Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Aims

To estimate the efficacy of standard and intensive statin treatment in the secondary prevention of major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in diabetes patients.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in Medline over the years 1990 to September 2013. Randomized, double-blind, clinical trials comparing a standard-dose statin with placebo or a standard-dose statin with an intensive-dose statin for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in diabetes patients were selected. Trial and patient characteristics were extracted independently by two researchers. The combined effect on the composite primary endpoint was measured with a fixed-effect model. Potential publication bias was examined with a funnel plot.

Results

Five trials were included in the analysis comparing standard-dose statins with placebo with a total of 4 351 participants. Four trials were included for comparing standard-dose with intensive-dose statins, including 4 805 participants. Compared with placebo, standard-dose statin treatment resulted in a significant relative risk (RR) reduction of 15% in the occurrence of any major cardiovascular or cerebrovascular event (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79–0.91). Compared with standard-dose statin treatment, intensive-dose statin treatment resulted in an additional 9% relative risk reduction (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84–0.98).

Conclusion

Treatment with standard-dose statins to prevent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events in diabetes patients with manifest cardiovascular disease results in an estimated 15% relative risk reduction and intensive-dose statin treatment adds 9%. If proven cost-effective, more intensive statin treatment should be recommended for diabetes patients at high cardiovascular risk.     

Statin therapy in heart failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme-A reductase inhibitors, or statins, have been shown to reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality among a wide spectrum of patients with established atherosclerotic vascular disease. Mounting experimental and clinical evidence also suggest a potential benefit as well as theoretical harm of statin therapy in patients with heart failure. RECENT FINDINGS: This article briefly summarizes the therapeutic properties of statins that may be of benefit to patients with heart failure and the theoretical adverse effects of cholesterol reduction in this group of patients. A number of nonrandomized clinical studies over the past several years have shown an association between statin use and reduced overall mortality. Several large-scale randomized studies designed to confirm these findings are currently under way. SUMMARY: Statin therapy appears to improve clinical outcomes in patients with both ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy independently of their cholesterol-lowering properties. The theoretical adverse properties of statins in heart failure patients have not been substantiated in small to medium-sized clinical trials. Although the encouraging results of these preliminary studies suggest a role for statin therapy in heart failure, larger studies are needed to validate these findings. Several ongoing randomized trials are currently under way to evaluate the effect of statin therapy on cardiovascular outcomes in heart failure patients. The results of these studies, expected in the next several years, should provide scientific evidence for the role of statins in the treatment of failure.     

Efficacy of statins for primary prevention in people at low cardiovascular risk: a meta-analysis

Background:

Statins were initially used to improve cardiovascular outcomes in people with established coronary artery disease, but recently their use has become more common in people at low cardiovascular risk. We did a systematic review of randomized trials to assess the efficacy and harms of statins in these individuals.

Methods:

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (to Jan. 28, 2011), registries of health technology assessments and clinical trials, and reference lists of relevant reviews. We included trials that randomly assigned participants at low cardiovascular risk to receive a statin versus a placebo or no statin. We defined low risk as an observed 10-year risk of less than 20% for cardiovascular-related death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, but we explored other definitions in sensitivity analyses.

Results:

We identified 29 eligible trials involving a total of 80 711 participants. All-cause mortality was significantly lower among patients receiving a statin than among controls (relative risk [RR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.97) for trials with a 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease < 20% [primary analysis] and 0.83, 95% CI 0.73–0.94, for trials with 10-year risk < 10% [sensitivity analysis]). Patients in the statin group were also significantly less likely than controls to have nonfatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49–0.84) and nonfatal stroke (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68–0.96). Neither metaregression nor stratified analyses suggested statistically significant differences in efficacy between high-and low-potency statins, or larger reductions in cholesterol.

Interpretation:

Statins were found to be efficacious in preventing death and cardiovascular morbidity in people at low cardiovascular risk. Reductions in relative risk were similar to those seen in patients with a history of coronary artery disease.Although statins are known to improve survival and relevant clinical outcomes in high-risk populations,¹ evidence of their clinical benefit in lower risk populations is more equivocal. Initially, low-risk populations were defined by the absence of known coronary artery disease (and their treatment was termed “primary prevention”). However, it was subsequently recognized that these populations included both patients at very high risk of coronary artery disease (e.g., those with severe peripheral vascular disease) and those at very low risk (e.g., those aged < 40 years who have no diabetes or hypertension and have low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of less than 1.8 mmol/L). Accordingly, current guidelines for the use of statins are based on the projected risk of an atherosclerotic event rather than solely on the presence or absence of known coronary artery disease.^2,3Results of the recent JUPITER study (Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin)⁴ have renewed enthusiasm for the use of statins in people without a history of coronary artery disease and have generated further controversy as to whether high-potency statins such as rosuvastatin and atorvastatin lead to better clinical outcomes than low-potency statins such as pravastatin, simvastatin, fluvastatin and lovastatin. We did a systematic review of randomized trials to assess the efficacy and harms of statins in people at low cardiovascular risk, including indirect comparisons of high-potency and low-potency statins.     

Statin Intensity and Clinical Outcome in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease and Very Low LDL-Cholesterol

BackgroundAlthough intensive statin therapy is recommended for high risk patients, evidence of its benefit in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and very low low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) has been very rare. In this study, we investigated whether higher statin intensity reduces cardiovascular risks in this population.MethodsIn this retrospective study, a total of 5234 patients with stable CAD were screened at three tertiary hospitals in Korea; 449 patients (mean age: 65 years, male: 69%) with LDL-C <80 mg/dL were finally analyzed. The statin intensities were classified according to the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. Patients who received statins equivalent to or weaker than atorvastatin 10 mg (group 1) were compared with those who took statins equivalent to or stronger than atorvastatin 20 mg (group 2). The impact of statin intensity on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was evaluated during follow-up.ResultsGroup 1 and group 2 consisted of 181 patients (40.3%) and 268 patients (59.7%), respectively. The mean LDL-C level decreased to 52 and 57 mg/dL in group 1 and group 2, respectively, during follow-up. In a median follow-up of 4.5 years, patients of group 2 had a lower incidence of MACE (30 [16.6%] vs. 12 [4.5%], p <0.001), which were mostly related to a lower incidence of coronary revascularization. Cox proportional hazard analyses identified the statin intensity of group 2 (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.25, confidence interval: 0.11–0.55, p <0.001) and the baseline high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level as independent determinants of MACE.ConclusionThis study provides evidence that higher intensity statins are beneficial for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with stable CAD and very low LDL-C. Statins equivalent to or stronger than atorvastatin 20 mg are more effective than lower intensity statins.     

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors and COVID-19 mortality in Stockholm,Sweden: A registry-based cohort study

BackgroundThe relationship between statin treatment and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality has been discussed due to the pleiotropic effects of statins on coagulation and immune mechanisms. However, available observational studies are hampered by study design flaws, resulting in substantial heterogeneity and ambiguities. Here, we aim to determine the relationship between statin treatment and COVID-19 mortality.Methods and findingsThis cohort study included all Stockholm residents aged 45 or older (N = 963,876), followed up from 1 March 2020 until 11 November 2020. The exposure was statin treatment initiated before the COVID-19-pandemic, defined as recorded statin dispensation in the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register between 1 March 2019 and 29 February 2020. COVID-19-specific mortality was ascertained from the Swedish Cause of Death Registry. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using multivariable Cox regression models. We further performed a target trial emulation restricted to initiators of statins.In the cohort (51.6% female), 169,642 individuals (17.6%) were statin users. Statin users were older (71.0 versus 58.0 years), more likely to be male (53.3% versus 46.7%), more often diagnosed with comorbidities (for example, ischemic heart disease 23.3% versus 1.6%), more frequently on anticoagulant and antihypertensive treatments, less likely to have a university-level education (34.5% versus 45.4%), and more likely to have a low disposable income (20.6% versus 25.2%), but less likely to reside in crowded housing (6.1% versus 10.3%).A total of 2,545 individuals died from COVID-19 during follow-up, including 765 (0.5%) of the statin users and 1,780 (0.2%) of the nonusers. Statin treatment was associated with a lowered COVID-19 mortality (adjusted HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.97, P = 0.01), and this association did not vary appreciably across age groups, sexes, or COVID-19 risk groups. The confounder adjusted HR for statin treatment initiators was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.59 to 1.05, P = 0.10) in the emulated target trial. Limitations of this study include the observational design, reliance on dispensation data, and the inability to study specific drug regimens.ConclusionsStatin treatment had a modest negative association with COVID-19 mortality. While this finding needs confirmation from randomized clinical trials, it supports the continued use of statin treatment for medical prevention according to current recommendations also during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this cohort study, Rita Bergqvist and colleagues investigate the relationship between statin treatment and COVID-19 mortality.     

Statin use after esophageal cancer diagnosis and survival: A population based cohort study

BackgroundA recent epidemiological study of esophageal cancer patients concluded statin use post-diagnosis was associated with large (38%) and significant reductions in cancer-specific mortality. We investigated statin use and cancer-specific mortality in a large population-based cohort of esophageal cancer patients.MethodsNewly diagnosed [2009–2012] esophageal cancer patients were identified from the Scottish Cancer Registry and linked with the Prescribing Information System and Scotland Death Records (to January 2015). Time-dependent Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) for cancer-specific mortality and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by post-diagnostic statin use (using a 6 month lag to reduce reverse causation) and to adjust these HRs for potential confounders.Results1921 esophageal cancer patients were included in the main analysis, of whom 651 (34%) used statins after diagnosis. There was little evidence of a reduction in esophageal cancer-specific mortality in statin users compared with non-users after diagnosis (adjusted HR = 0.93, 95% CI, 0.81, 1.07) and no dose response associations were seen. However, statin users compared with non-users in the year before diagnosis had a weak reduction in esophageal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.79, 0.99).ConclusionsIn this large population-based esophageal cancer cohort, there was little evidence of a reduction in esophageal cancer-specific mortality with statin use after diagnosis.     

Effects of statins in patients with chronic kidney disease: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised controlled trials

Objective To analyse the benefits and harms of statins in patients with chronic kidney disease (pre-dialysis, dialysis, and transplant populations).Design Meta-analysis.Data sources Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, and Renal Health Library (July 2006).Study selection Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of statins compared with placebo or other statins in chronic kidney disease.Data extraction and analysis Two reviewers independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed trial quality. Differences were resolved by consensus. Treatment effects were summarised as relative risks or weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals by using a random effects model.Results Fifty trials (30 144 patients) were included. Compared with placebo, statins significantly reduced total cholesterol (42 studies, 6390 patients; weighted mean difference −42.28 mg/dl (1.10 mmol/l), 95% confidence interval −47.25 to −37.32), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (39 studies, 6216 patients; −43.12 mg/dl (1.12 mmol/l), −47.85 to −38.40), and proteinuria (g/24 hours) (6 trials, 311 patients; −0.73 g/24 hour, −0.95 to −0.52) but did not improve glomerular filtration rate (11 studies, 548 patients; 1.48 ml/min (0.02 ml/s), −2.32 to 5.28). Fatal cardiovascular events (43 studies, 23 266 patients; relative risk 0.81, 0.73 to 0.90) and non-fatal cardiovascular events (8 studies, 22 863 patients; 0.78, 0.73 to 0.84) were reduced with statins, but statins had no significant effect on all cause mortality (44 studies, 23 665 patients; 0.92, 0.82 to 1.03). Meta-regression analysis showed that treatment effects did not vary significantly with stage of chronic kidney disease. The side effect profile of statins was similar to that of placebo. Most of the available studies were small and of suboptimal quality; mortality data were provided by a few large trials only.Conclusion Statins significantly reduce lipid concentrations and cardiovascular end points in patients with chronic kidney disease, irrespective of stage of disease, but no benefit on all cause mortality or the role of statins in primary prevention has been established. Reno-protective effects of statins are uncertain because of relatively sparse data and possible outcomes reporting bias.     

Update for primary healthcare providers: recent statin trials and revised National Cholesterol Education Program III guidelines

Statins produce large, clinically important beneficial effects on total low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglycerides while raising high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol--each of which increases the risks for cardiovascular disease (CVD). In randomized trials of secondary and primary prevention, and their meta-analyses, statins confer statistically significant, clinically important reductions in myocardial infarction, stroke, and CVD death. In 2001, the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III included LDL as the primary target, recommending optional goals of < 100 mg/dL for high-risk patients, < 130 mg/dL for moderate-risk patients, and < 160 mg/dL for low-risk patients. We conducted a search of randomized trials of statins whose results were published since May 15, 2001. We extracted overall trial results and data on adverse events, when available. We reviewed 7 published trials of statins, some of which contributed to the recent addendum to the NCEP ATP III guidelines that recommend reducing LDL goals to < 70 for very high-risk and < 100 for moderately high-risk patients via statins. Data from these trials demonstrate that greater LDL reductions produce larger CVD benefits in various categories of high- and moderate-risk patients, including a large number of primary prevention patients with metabolic syndrome who should be treated as aggressively as patients who have survived a myocardial infarction or stroke. Together, these recent statin trials and the NCEP ATP III revised guidelines, if implemented by primary healthcare providers, would result in many more patients receiving statins of proven benefit and reassuring adverse event profile.     

Statin initiation and treatment non-adherence following a first acute myocardial infarction in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease versus the general population

Introduction

To compare statin initiation and treatment non-adherence following a first acute myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease (IRD) and the general population.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a population-based linked database. Cases of first MI from July 2001 to June 2009 were identified based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-AM) codes. Statin initiation and adherence was identified based on pharmaceutical claims records. Logistic regression was used to assess the odds of statin initiation by IRD status. Non-adherence was assessed as the time to first treatment gap using a Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

There were 18,518 individuals with an index MI over the time period surviving longer than 30 days, of whom 415 (2.2%) were IRD patients. The adjusted odds of receiving a statin by IRD status was significantly lower (OR =0.69, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.86) compared to the general population. No association between IRD status and statin non-adherence was identified (hazard ratio (HR) =1.12, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.52).

Conclusions

Statin initiation was significantly lower for people with IRD conditions compared to the general population. Once initiated on statins, the proportion of IRD patients who adhered to treatment was similar to the general population. Given the burden of cardiovascular disease and excess mortality in IRD patients, encouraging the use of evidence-based therapies is critical for ensuring the best outcomes in this high risk group.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-014-0443-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

DNA Methylation Combinations in Adjacent Normal Colon Tissue Predict Cancer Recurrence: Evidence from a Clinical Cohort Study

Accumulating evidence has suggested the requirement for further stratification of patients in the same tumor stage according to molecular factors. We evaluate the combination of cancer stage and DNA methylation status as an indicator of the risk of recurrence and mortality among patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). A cohort study of 215 patients with CRC (mean age 64.32 years; 50.5% of men) from Tri-Service General Hospital in Taiwan examined the association between cancer stage and risk of CRC recurrence and mortality. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze patient methylation status and clinical information at study entry, and their associations with CRC recurrence and mortality during follow-up. The advanced stage patients with p16, hMLH1, and MGMT methylation were associated with higher risk of CRC recurrence compared with the local stage patients with unmethylation status in tumor tissues, with adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 9.64 (2.92–31.81), 8.29 (3.40–20.22), and 11.83 (3.49–40.12), respectively. When analyzing normal tissues, we observed similar risk of CRC recurrence with adjusted HRs (95% CI) of 10.85 (4.06–28.96), 9.04 (3.79–21.54), and 12.61 (4.90–32.44), respectively. For combined analyses, the risk of recurrence in the patients in advanced stage with DNA methylation in both normal and tumor tissues, compared with local stage with unmethylation, was increased with adjusted HR (95% CI) of 9.37 (3.36–26.09). In the advanced stage patients, methylation status and tissue subtype were associated with increased risk of 5-year cumulative CRC recurrence (p < 0.001). This study demonstrates that clustering DNA methylation status according to cancer stage and tissue subtype is critical for the assessment of risk of recurrence in CRC patients and also indicated an underlying mechanism.     

Effects of Statin Therapy on Clinical Outcomes of Survivors of Acute Myocardial Infarction with Severe Systolic Heart Failure

Objective

Large randomized trials have failed to show a beneficial effect of statin treatment in chronic HF. The investigators tried to evaluate the long-term effects of statin therapy in patients with new onset heart failure (HF) following acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

Methods

Between January 2008 and December 2011, a total of 13,616 AMI patients were enrolled in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR) which was a prospective, multi-center, nationwide, web-based database of AMI in Korea. From this database, we studied 1,055 patients with AMI who had newly developed severe acute HF [left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%] and were discharged alive. The patients were divided into two groups, a statin group (n = 756) and a no-statin group (n = 299). We investigated the one-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including all-cause mortality, MI, and any revascularization of each group. We then performed a propensity-score matched analysis.

Results

In the original cohort, one-year MACEs were similar between the two groups (16.5% vs. 14.7% in the statin or no-statin groups; p = 0.47). Propensity-score matching yielded 256 pairs, and in that population we observed comparable results in terms of MACEs (18.0% vs. 12.5% in the statin or no-statin groups, p = 0.11) and mortality (5.1% vs. 3.5% in the statin or no-statin groups, p = 0.51). Cox-regression analysis revealed that statin therapy was not an independent predictor for occurrence of a MACE [Hazard ratio (HR) 1.11, 95% CI 0.79–1.57, p = 0.54] or all-cause mortality (HR 1.42, 95% CI 0.75–2.70, p = 0.28).

Conclusion

Statin therapy was not associated with a reduction in the long-term occurrence of MACEs or mortality in survivors of AMI with severe acute HF in this retrospective cohort study.     

Are statins anti-inflammatory?

Large scale clinical trials demonstrate significant reductions in cardiovascular event rates with statin therapy. The observed benefit of statin therapy, however, may be larger in these trials than that expected on the basis of lipid lowering alone. Emerging evidence from both clinical trials and basic science studies suggest that statins have anti-inflammatory properties, which may additionally lead to clinical efficacy. Measurement of markers of inflammation such as high sensitivity C-reactive protein in addition to lipid parameters may help identify those patients who will benefit most from statin therapy.     

Cardiovascular disease with diabetes or the metabolic syndrome: should statins or fibrates be first line lipid therapy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Subgroups with diabetes or with features of the metabolic syndrome have been increasingly highlighted in large clinical endpoint trials with lipid therapy. This review will focus on the results of trials with statins or fibrates and examine the strength of the evidence for major cardiovascular event reduction with each kind of therapy in these high-risk subgroups that typically have low-to-moderate levels of LDL cholesterol. RECENT FINDINGS: Of six statin trials in populations with moderately increased LDL cholesterol only one, the Heart Protection Study, has shown that statin therapy will significantly reduce the major coronary heart disease events of non-fatal myocardial infarction or coronary heart disease death in diabetes. None of these trials has shown that statins have a particular predilection for reducing cardiovascular events in individuals with higher levels of body weight or other features of the metabolic syndrome. There are far fewer trial data with fibrates than with statins. However, the Veterans Affairs High Density Lipoprotein Intervention Trial has shown that a fibrate can significantly reduce major cardiovascular events, most particularly coronary heart disease death, in those with diabetes as well as those without diabetes who have insulin resistance. Indeed, all fibrate trials show that this therapy appears to selectively benefit the individual with obesity and features of the metabolic syndrome. SUMMARY: Based principally on evidence from the Veterans Affairs High Density Lipoprotein Intervention Trial and the cumulative experience with statins, trial data would thus far suggest that the patient with a modest increase in LDL cholesterol who has diabetes or features of the metabolic syndrome might be likely to achieve more substantial cardiovascular benefit from fibrate than from statin therapy.     

Reduced Glomerular Filtration Rate and Its Association with Clinical Outcome in Older Patients at Risk of Vascular Events: Secondary Analysis

Background

Reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk in young and middle aged individuals. Associations with cardiovascular disease and mortality in older people are less clearly established. We aimed to determine the predictive value of the GFR for mortality and morbidity using data from the 5,804 participants randomized in the Prospective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER).

Methods and Findings

Glomerular filtration rate was estimated (eGFR) using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation and was categorized in the ranges ([20–40], [40–50], [50–60]) ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m². Baseline risk factors were analysed by category of eGFR, with and without adjustment for other risk factors. The associations between baseline eGFR and morbidity and mortality outcomes, accrued after an average of 3.2 y, were investigated using Cox proportional hazard models adjusting for traditional risk factors. We tested for evidence of an interaction between the benefit of statin treatment and baseline eGFR status. Age, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, C-reactive protein (CRP), body mass index, fasting glucose, female sex, histories of hypertension and vascular disease were associated with eGFR (p = 0.001 or less) after adjustment for other risk factors. Low eGFR was independently associated with risk of all cause mortality, vascular mortality, and other noncancer mortality and with fatal and nonfatal coronary and heart failure events (hazard ratios adjusted for CRP and other risk factors (95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for eGFR < 40 ml/min/1.73m² relative to eGFR ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73m² respectively 2.04 (1.48–2.80), 2.37 (1.53–3.67), 3.52 (1.78–6.96), 1.64 (1.18–2.27), 3.31 (2.03–5.41). There were no nominally statistically significant interactions (p < 0.05) between randomized treatment allocation and eGFR for clinical outcomes, with the exception of the outcome of coronary heart disease death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (p = 0.021), with the interaction suggesting increased benefit of statin treatment in subjects with impaired GFRs.

Conclusions

We have established that, in an elderly population over the age of 70 y, impaired GFR is associated with female sex, with presence of vascular disease, and with levels of other risk factors that would be associated with increased risk of vascular disease. Further, impaired GFR is independently associated with significant levels of increased risk of all cause mortality and fatal vascular events and with composite fatal and nonfatal coronary and heart failure outcomes. Our analyses of the benefits of statin treatment in relation to baseline GFR suggest that there is no reason to exclude elderly patients with impaired renal function from treatment with a statin.     

Statin Use Is Not Associated with Improved Progression Free Survival in Cetuximab Treated KRAS Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: Results from the CAIRO2 Study

Statins may inhibit the expression of the mutant KRAS phenotype by preventing the prenylation and thus the activation of the KRAS protein. This study was aimed at retrospectively evaluating the effect of statin use on outcome in KRAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC) treated with cetuximab. Treatment data were obtained from patients who were treated with capecitabine, oxaliplatin bevacizumab ± cetuximab in the phase III CAIRO2 study. A total of 529 patients were included in this study, of whom 78 patients were on statin therapy. In patients with a KRAS wild type tumor (n = 321) the median PFS was 10.3 vs. 11.4 months for non-users compared to statin users and in patients with a KRAS mutant tumor (n = 208) this was 7.6 vs. 6.2 months, respectively. The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS for statin users was 1.12 (95% confidence interval 0.78–1.61) and was not influenced by treatment arm, KRAS mutation status or the KRAS*statin interaction. Statin use adjusted for covariates was not associated with increased PFS (HR = 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.71–1.54). In patients with a KRAS wild type tumor the median OS for non-users compared to statin users was 22.4 vs. 19.8 months and in the KRAS mutant tumor group the OS was 18.1 vs. 14.5 months. OS was significantly shorter in statin users versus non-users (HR = 1.54; 95% confidence interval 1.06–2.22). However, statin use, adjusted for covariates was not associated with increased OS (HR = 1.41, 95% confidence interval 0.95–2.10). In conclusion, the use of statins at time of diagnosis was not associated with an improved PFS in KRAS mutant mCRC patients treated with chemotherapy and bevacizumab plus cetuximab.     

Persistence with Statins and Onset of Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Background

The beneficial effects of statins in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been suggested previously, but it is unclear whether statins may prevent its development. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to explore whether persistent use of statins is associated with onset of RA.

Methods and Findings

The computerized medical databases of a large health organization in Israel were used to identify diagnosed RA cases among adults who began statin therapy between 1998 and 2007. Persistence with statins was assessed by calculating the mean proportion of follow-up days covered (PDC) with statins for every study participant. To assess the possible effects of healthy user bias, we also examined the risk of osteoarthritis (OA), a common degenerative joint disease that is unlikely to be affected by use of statins.A total of 211,627 and 193,770 individuals were eligible for the RA and OA cohort analyses, respectively. During the study follow-up period, there were 2,578 incident RA cases (3.07 per 1,000 person-years) and 17,878 incident OA cases (24.34 per 1,000 person-years). The crude incidence density rate of RA among nonpersistent patients (PDC level of <20%) was 51% higher (3.89 per 1,000 person-years) compared to highly persistent patients who were covered with statins for at least 80% of the follow-up period. After adjustment for potential confounders, highly persistent patients had a hazard ratio of 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.52–0.65) for RA compared with nonpersistent patients. Larger differences were observed in younger patients and in patients initiating treatment with high efficacy statins. In the OA cohort analysis, high persistence with statins was associated only with a modest decrement in risk ratio (hazard ratio = 0.85; 0.81–0.88) compared to nonadherent patients.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrates an association between persistence with statin therapy and reduced risk of developing RA. The relationship between continuation of statin use and OA onset was weak and limited to patients with short-term follow-up. Please see later in the article for the Editors'' Summary     

Carotid intimal-media thickness as a surrogate for cardiovascular disease events in trials of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors

BACKGROUND: Surrogate measures for cardiovascular disease events have the potential to increase greatly the efficiency of clinical trials. A leading candidate for such a surrogate is the progression of intima-media thickness (IMT) of the carotid artery; much experience has been gained with this endpoint in trials of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins). METHODS AND RESULTS: We examine two separate systems of criteria that have been proposed to define surrogate endpoints, based on clinical and statistical arguments. We use published results and a formal meta-analysis to evaluate whether progression of carotid IMT meets these criteria for HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins).IMT meets clinical-based criteria to serve as a surrogate endpoint for cardiovascular events in statin trials, based on relative efficiency, linkage to endpoints, and congruency of effects. Results from a meta-analysis and post-trial follow-up from a single published study suggest that IMT meets established statistical criteria by accounting for intervention effects in regression models. CONCLUSION: Carotid IMT progression meets accepted definitions of a surrogate for cardiovascular disease endpoints in statin trials. This does not, however, establish that it may serve universally as a surrogate marker in trials of other agents.     

Statin Therapy Is Associated with Improved Survival in Patients with Non-Serous-Papillary Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

Aim

To determine whether statin use is associated with improved epithelial ovarian cancer (OvCa) survival.

Methods

This is a single-institution retrospective cohort review of patients treated for OvCa between 1992 and 2013. Inclusion criteria were International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I–IV OvCa. The primary exposures analyzed were hyperlipidemia and statin use. The primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS).

Results

442 patients met inclusion criteria. The cohort was divided into three groups: patients with hyperlipidemia who used statins (n = 68), patients with hyperlipidemia who did not use statins (n = 28), and patients without hyperlipidemia (n = 346). OvCa outcomes were evaluated. When we analyzed the entire cohort, we found no significant differences in PFS or DSS among the groups. The median PFS for hyperlipidemics using statins, hyperlipidemics not using statins, and non-hyperlipidemics was 21.7, 13.6, and 14.7 months, respectively (p = 0.69). Median DSS for hyperlipidemics using statins, hyperlipidemics not using statins, and non-hyperlipidemics was 44.2, 75.7, and 41.5 months, respectively (p = 0.43). These findings did not change after controlling for confounders. However, a secondary analysis revealed that, among patients with non-serous-papillary subtypes of OvCa, statin use was associated with a decrease in hazards of both disease recurrence (adjusted HR = 0.23, p = 0.02) and disease-specific death (adjusted HR = 0.23, p = 0.04). To augment the findings in the retrospective cohort, the histology-specific effects of statins were also evaluated in vitro using proliferation assays. Here, statin treatment of cell lines resulted in a variable level of cytotoxicity.

Conclusion

Statin use among patients with non-serous-papillary OvCa was associated with improvement in both PFS and DSS.