Could Giving Statins to over 75s Really Save 8000 Lives a Year?

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1779

2019-01-01

Abstract:The press spoke with one voice about a recent meta-analysis of statin use in older people, but the figure of 8000 wasn’t in the study. Nigel Hawkes investigates

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

US Task Force Recommends Statins in Healthy People Despite Limited Benefits

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6097

2016-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:The benefit of giving statins to healthy middle aged people with a 10% risk of developing cardiovascular disease in the next decade is very likely to be moderate, a leading US guideline group has concluded. But it said that these people should be given the drugs nonetheless because the benefits, though moderate, were likely to exceed the harms. The guidance, from the US Preventive Services Task Force, excluded those aged over 75 because, it said, there was insufficient evidence in older people.1 In this respect, it differs from guidance given by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), which favours statin prescription up to the age of 84. The new US guidance is broadly in line with that of NICE and of the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA), which is not surprising …
NICE Guidelines Could Put 12 Million UK Adults on Statins

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j3674

2017-01-01

Abstract:Almost all men over 60 and all women over 75 in England qualify for statin prescriptions under guidelines adopted by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in 2014, a new analysis shows.1 Some 11.8 million people in England—37% of adults aged 30 to 84—exceed the threshold set by NICE for prescribing statins, the authors found. They said that most of these patients (9.8 million) are healthy, with no history of cardiovascular events, and are eligible for treatment simply because they exceed the risk threshold set by NICE: a 10% risk of experiencing such an event in the next 10 years. Even some people with no risk factors at all are part of this group by virtue of their age. Nearly all men exceed the 10% threshold by age 65, and all women do so by age 70, even if they are non-smokers of normal weight with …
Association of statin use in older people primary prevention group with risk of cardiovascular events and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Kamal Awad,Maged Mohammed,Mahmoud Mohamed Zaki,Abdelrahman I Abushouk,Gregory Y H Lip,Michael J Blaha,Carl J Lavie,Peter P Toth,J Wouter Jukema,Naveed Sattar,Maciej Banach,Lipid and Blood Pressure Meta-analysis Collaboration (LBPMC) Group and the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-021-02009-1

2021-06-22

Abstract:Background: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials on statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in older people, especially those aged > 75 years, is still lacking. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to extend the current evidence about the association of statin use in older people primary prevention group with risk of CVD and mortality. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched from inception until March 18, 2021. We included observational studies (cohort or nested case-control) that compared statin use vs non-use for primary prevention of CVD in older people aged ≥ 65 years; provided that each of them reported the risk estimate on at least one of the following primary outcomes: all cause-mortality, CVD death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke. Risk estimates of each relevant outcome were pooled as a hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects meta-analysis model. The quality of the evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: Ten observational studies (9 cohorts and one case-control study; n = 815,667) fulfilled our criteria. The overall combined estimate suggested that statin therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.86 [95% CI 0.79 to 0.93]), CVD death (HR: 0.80 [95% CI 0.78 to 0.81]), and stroke (HR: 0.85 [95% CI 0.76 to 0.94]) and a non-significant association with risk of MI (HR 0.74 [95% CI 0.53 to 1.02]). The beneficial association of statins with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant even at higher ages (> 75 years old; HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81 to 0.96]) and in both men (HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.74 to 0.76]) and women (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.72 to 0.99]). However, this association with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant only in those with diabetes mellitus (DM) (HR 0.82 [95% CI 0.68 to 0.98]) but not in those without DM. The level of evidence of all the primary outcomes was rated as "very low." Conclusions: Statin therapy in older people (aged ≥ 65 years) without CVD was associated with a 14%, 20%, and 15% lower risk of all-cause mortality, CVD death, and stroke, respectively. The beneficial association with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant even at higher ages (> 75 years old), in both men and women, and in individuals with DM, but not in those without DM. These observational findings support the need for trials to test the benefits of statins in those above 75 years of age.
Statins for Primary Prevention in Older People Do Not Cut Mortality or Chd Events, Study Finds

Susan Mayor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j2486

2017-01-01

Abstract:Treating older people who have moderate hyperlipidaemia and hypertension with statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease does not reduce mortality or coronary heart disease events, results from a post-hoc analysis of a large randomised trial have shown.1 Many older patients take statins for primary cardiovascular disease prevention. Although some evidence shows benefits from statins for secondary prevention in older people with cardiovascular diseases, limited data are available on the risks and benefits for primary prevention in this age group. Researchers carried out a post-hoc analysis of data …
Who should receive a statin these days? Lessons from recent clinical trials

J Shepherd

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2006.01700.x

Abstract:The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors or statins are the most successful cardiovascular drugs of all time. By interrupting cholesterol synthesis in the liver, they activate hepatocyte low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors and produce consistent and predictable reductions in circulating LDL cholesterol with resulting reproducible improvements in cardiovascular risk by retarding or even regressing the march of atherosclerosis in all major arterial trees (coronary, cerebral and peripheral). Clinical trials have demonstrated their capacity not only to extend life, but also to improve its quality by retarding the progression of diabetes mellitus and chronic renal disease and by enhancing central and peripheral blood flow. They are amongst the most extensively investigated pharmaceutical agents in current clinical use. In cardiovascular end-point trials they have proven ability to help prevent that first and all important myocardial infarction and to reduce the likelihood of a recurrence in those who do succumb. They are equally effective in men and women of all ages and at all levels of cardiovascular risk, whether caused by hypercholesterolaemia, hypertension, cigarette smoking, diabetes mellitus or the metabolic syndrome. In addition, they improve the outlook of patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia whose LDL receptor function is deficient or defective; and all of this comes at minimal risk to the recipient. Their most important potential side effect is myopathy, which on very rare occasions may lead to rhabdomyolysis. Clinical experience shows that myopathic symptoms with creatine kinase levels raised to more than 10 times the upper limit of normal is seen in <0.01% of recipients and progression to fatal rhabdomyolysis because of renal failure has been recorded in only 0.15 cases per million prescriptions. Liver function abnormalities are also, rarely, seen. Again, the frequency of raised aspartate or alanine aminotransferase to more than three times the normal limit is encountered in no more than 1-2% of all treated patients and is completely reversible upon withdrawal of treatment. Progression to hepatitis or liver failure does not occur. This constellation of benefits with little side effect penalty has resulted in the comparison of statins with antibiotics in the global battle against cardiovascular disease.
Benefits of Statins Have Been Underestimated and Harms Overstated, Review Finds

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4893

2016-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:People are confused about statins because too much emphasis is placed on observational studies and too little on randomised controlled trials (RCTs), a review published in the Lancet shows. The benefits have been underplayed and the harms exaggerated as a result of this misperception, the authors argue.1 Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet , said that the controversy over statins had probably harmed the health of thousands of people across the United Kingdom and that the review aimed to better inform patients and their doctors. “We hope the impact will be to correct the public record about the safety and efficacy of statins but also to highlight the problems about unreliable evidence and minority opinions,” Horton told a media briefing at the Science Media Centre in London on Wednesday. Rory Collins of the University of Oxford, the review’s lead author, said that …
Lifetime effects and cost-effectiveness of statin therapy for older people in the United Kingdom: a modelling study

Borislava Mihaylova,Runguo Wu,Junwen Zhou,Claire Williams,Iryna Schlackow,Jonathan Emberson,Christina Reith,Anthony Keech,John Robson,Richard Parnell,Jane Armitage,Alastair Gray,John Simes,Colin Baigent

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324052

IF: 5.7

2024-10-11

Heart

Abstract:Background Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk increases with age. Statins reduce cardiovascular risk but their effects are less certain at older ages. We assessed the long-term effects and cost-effectiveness of statin therapy for older people in the contemporary UK population using a recent meta-analysis of randomised evidence of statin effects in older people and a new validated CVD model. Methods The performance of the CVD microsimulation model, developed using the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration (CTTC) and UK Biobank cohort, was assessed among participants ≥70 years old at (re)surveys in UK Biobank and the Whitehall II studies. The model projected participants' cardiovascular risks, survival, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and healthcare costs (2021 UK£) with and without lifetime standard (35%–45% low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction) or higher intensity (≥45% reduction) statin therapy. CTTC individual participant data and other meta-analyses informed statins' effects on cardiovascular risks, incident diabetes, myopathy and rhabdomyolysis. Sensitivity of findings to smaller CVD risk reductions and to hypothetical further adverse effects with statins were assessed. Results In categories of men and women ≥70 years old without (15,019) and with (5,103) prior CVD, lifetime use of a standard statin increased QALYs by 0.24–0.70 and a higher intensity statin by a further 0.04–0.13 QALYs per person. Statin therapies were cost-effective with an incremental cost per QALY gained below £3502/QALY for standard and below £11778/QALY for higher intensity therapy and with high probability of being cost-effective. In sensitivity analyses, statins remained cost-effective although with larger uncertainty in cost-effectiveness among older people without prior CVD. Conclusions Based on current evidence for the effects of statin therapy and modelling analysis, statin therapy improved health outcomes cost-effectively for men and women ≥70 years old.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Six Professors Back NICE Guidance on Extending Use of Statins.

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g4380

2014-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:The so called statins war triggered by two papers in The BMJ 1 2 and new guidance from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommending wider use of the drugs shows no signs yet of a ceasefire. At a press briefing in London organised by the Science Media Centre, six leading professors of cardiology and epidemiology stated their conviction that the evidence from trials amply justified their confidence that the benefits of statins outweighed any risks. The authors of the two papers in The BMJ had been wrong, they said, and NICE had been right to suggest that statins should be offered to patients who didn’t have a high risk of cardiovascular events. The Oxford University academic Rory Collins, head of the CTT (cholesterol treatment triallists) group, said that the authors of the two papers in The BMJ had withdrawn their claim that 18-20% of statin users experienced side effects. But they had not withdrawn a claim that 5% of users have myopathy. “Actually it’s 100 times less,” he said. He had earlier called for a full retraction of the papers and criticised The BMJ ’s …
Statins in Primary Prevention in People Over 80 Years

Elodie Marcellaud,Jeremy Jost,Achille Tchalla,Julien Magne,Victor Aboyans

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.10.015

2023-01-15

Abstract:In the much older population (≥80 years), the management of cardiovascular diseases requires specific research to avoid a plain transposition of medical practice from younger populations. Whether statins are useful in primary prevention in this population is not clear. The 3 intricate issues requiring attention are (1) the impact of hypercholesterolemia on mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events in subjects >80 years, (2) the efficacy of statins to prevent cardiovascular events at this age, and (3) the safety and tolerance of statins in this population. Three systematic reviews were performed using a search on EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases including publication until January 2021. Among the 7,617 references identified, 29 were finally retained. Regarding the first objective (16 studies, 121,250 participants), 7 studies (10,241 participants) did not find total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein levels associated with an increased rate of major cardiovascular events in octogenarians. A total of 6 studies (14,493 participants) found increased levels associated with events, whereas 3 studies (96,516 participants) found the opposite, with increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events with lower levels of cholesterol. In 8 studies (436,005 participants) addressing the efficacy of statins, most did not indicate a significant decrease in the rate of major cardiovascular events in these subjects. Finally, regarding tolerance (9 studies, 217,088 participants), the most important side effects in this population were muscular, hepatic, and gastrointestinal disorders. These events were more frequent than in the younger population. In conclusion, in the absence of convincing evidence, the benefit of statins in primary prevention for much older patients is not certain. Their prescription in this setting should only be considered case by case, taking into consideration physiological status, co-morbidities, level of risk, and expected life expectancy. Specific trials are mandatory.
Statin utilization and cardiovascular outcomes in a real-world primary prevention cohort of older adults

Aaron J Walker,Jianhui Zhu,Floyd Thoma,Oscar Marroquin,Amber Makani,Martha Gulati,Eugenia Gianos,Salim S Virani,Fatima Rodriguez,Steven E Reis,Christie Ballantyne,Suresh Mulukutla,Anum Saeed

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpc.2024.100664

2024-04-05

Abstract:Background: Statins are a cost-effective therapy for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Guidelines on statins for primary prevention are unclear for older adults (>75 years). Objective: Investigate statin utility in older adults without ASCVD events, by risk stratifying in a large healthcare network. Methods: We included 8,114 older adults, without CAD, PVD or ischemic stroke. Statin utilization based on ACC/AHA 10-year ASCVD risk calculation, was evaluated in intermediate (7.5%-19.9%) and high-risk patients (≥ 20%); and categorized using low and 'moderate or high' intensity statins with a follow up period of ∼7 years. Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios for incident ASCVD and mortality across risk categories stratified by statin utilization. Data was adjusted for competing risk using Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. Results: Compared with those on moderate or high intensity statins, high-risk older patients not on any statin had a significantly increased risk of MI [HR 1.51 (1.17-1.95); p<0.01], stroke [HR 1.47 (1.14-1.90); p<0.01] and all-cause mortality [HR 1.37 (1.19-1.58); p<0.001] in models adjusted for Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. When comparing the no statin group versus the moderate or high intensity statin group in the intermediate risk cohort, although a trend for increased risk was seen, it did not meet statistical significance thresholds for MI, stroke or all-cause mortality. Conclusion: Lack of statin use was associated with increased cardiovascular events and mortality in high-risk older adults. Given the benefits appreciated, statin use may need to be strongly considered for primary ASCVD prevention among high-risk older adults. Future studies will assess the risk-benefit ratio of statin intervention in older adults.
Lifetime effects and cost-effectiveness of standard and higher-intensity statin therapy across population categories in the UK: a microsimulation modelling study

Borislava Mihaylova,Runguo Wu,Junwen Zhou,Claire Williams,Iryna Schlackow,Jonathan Emberson,Christina Reith,Anthony Keech,John Robson,Richard Parnell,Jane Armitage,Alastair Gray,John Simes,Colin Baigent

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.100887

2024-03-22

Abstract:Background: Cardiovascular disease incidence and mortality have declined across developed economies and granular up-to-date cost-effectiveness evidence is required for treatments targeting large populations. To assess the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of standard and higher intensity statin therapy in the contemporary UK population 40-70 years old. Methods: A cardiovascular disease microsimulation model, developed using the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration data (117,896 participants; 5 years follow-up), and calibrated in the UK Biobank cohort (501,854 participants; 9 years follow-up), projected risks of myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, diabetes, cancer and vascular and nonvascular death for all UK Biobank participants without and with statin treatment. Meta-analyses of trials and cohort studies informed statins' relative effects on cardiovascular events, incident diabetes, myopathy and rhabdomyolysis. UK healthcare perspective was taken (2020/2021 UK£) with costs per 28 tablets of £1.10 for standard (35%-45% LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction) and £1.68 for higher intensity (≥45% LDL-C reduction) generic statin. Findings: Across categories by sex, age, LDL-C, and cardiovascular disease history/10-year cardiovascular risk, lifetime standard statin increased survival by 0.28-1.85 years (0.20-1.09 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)), and higher intensity statin by further 0.06-0.40 years (0.03-0.20 QALYs) per person. Standard statin was cost-effective across all categories with incremental cost per QALY from £280 to £8530, with higher intensity statin cost-effective at higher cardiovascular risks and higher LDL-C levels. Stopping statin early reduced benefits and was not cost-effective. Interpretation: Lifetime low-cost statin therapy is cost-effective across all 40-70 years old in UK. Strengthening and widening statin treatment could cost-effectively improve population health. Funding: UK NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme (17/140/02).
NICE Sticks to Its Advice to Drop Threshold for Prescribing Statins

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g4694

2014-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:The group responsible for recommending the wider use of statins had faced “completely unjustified attacks on their integrity,” the director of the Centre for Clinical Practice at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) complained at a press conference in London to launch the final version of the guidance.Mark Baker said that the group had shown great resilience in producing “important and high quality guidance, of which we’re all proud.” All panel members had declared any relevant interests, and none stood to gain financially from the guidance, he added.When released in draft form for consultation, the guidance prompted the publication of a letter signed, among others, by Richard Thompson, president of the Royal College of Physicians, and Clare Gerada, former chairwoman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, warning of the risks of medicalising five million healthy people on the basis of drug company trials.1 A majority of the NICE panel members had ties to companies that made statins, the letter claimed, and it called for the guidance to be shelved. …
Study Links Negative News Stories about Statins to Patients' Likelihood of Giving Them Up.

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h6522

2015-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:Negative news stories about statins are followed by reduced compliance, a study in Denmark has found. Positive stories have the opposite effect. The authors, Sune Fallgaard Nielsen and Borge Gronne Nordestgaard of Copenhagen University Hospital, said that although they could not conclude that the negative stories caused early discontinuation, their findings indicated that this was likely. “If negative statin related news stories did not exist at all, then early statin discontinuation would decrease by 1.3% in the whole of the population,” Nordestgaard said in a press release accompanying the paper, published in European Heart Journal . In the paper itself the authors were more cautious, saying that “great care should be taken in the interpretation of the present results.”1 They reached their conclusions by looking at more than 670 000 people prescribed statins between 1995 and 2010—all those …
Determining Cost-Saving Risk Thresholds for Statin Use

Afschin Gandjour

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.14.24311999

2024-08-20

Abstract:Background: Statins are widely prescribed to reduce cholesterol levels and decrease the risk of cardiovascular diseases. This study aims to determine cost-saving risk thresholds for statin use in Germany to inform better prescription practices and healthcare policies. Methods: A decision-analytic approach was employed, using secondary data to compare statin use with no statin use from the perspective of German sickness fund insurees. The analysis focused on cost savings from avoided cardiovascular (CV) events, translating these avoided events into net savings after accounting for treatment costs and potential side effects. The study considered the German adult population insured by sickness funds and used a lifetime horizon for the analysis. Results: The maximum number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve cost savings over 10 years was found to be 40, leading to a minimum risk threshold for savings of 9.8%. It was estimated that approximately 22% of the adult population in Germany has a 10-year CV risk of 9.8%, potentially avoiding between 307,049 and 705,537 CV events over 10 years, with net population savings of approximately 18 billion euros. Conclusions: The current official threshold for statin prescription in Germany, set at a 20% 10-year risk, is too stringent. Lowering the threshold to 9.8% could significantly increase the number of patients benefiting from statin therapy, reducing CV events and generating substantial cost savings. These findings suggest that adjustments to prescription guidelines could improve cardiovascular outcomes and economic efficiency within the German healthcare system.
Dissecting the multifaceted impact of statin use on fatty liver disease: a multidimensional study

Ibrahim Ayada,Laurens A van Kleef,Huai Zhang,Kuan Liu,Pengfei Li,Yasir J Abozaid,Marla Lavrijsen,Harry L A Janssen,Luc J W van der Laan,Mohsen Ghanbari,Maikel P Peppelenbosch,Ming-Hua Zheng,Robert J de Knegt,Qiuwei Pan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.104392

IF: 11.205

EBioMedicine

Abstract:Background: Statin use could benefit patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), but the evidence is segmented and inconclusive. This multidimensional study comprehensively investigated the potential benefits and mechanism-of-action of statins in NAFLD. Methods: A cross-sectional investigation was performed within the Rotterdam Study (general population; n = 4.576) and the PERSONS cohort (biopsy-proven NAFLD patients; n = 569). Exclusion criteria were secondary causes for steatosis and insufficient data on alcohol, dyslipidemia or statin use. Associations of statin use with NAFLD (among entire general population), fibrosis and NASH (among NAFLD individuals and patients) were quantified. These results were pooled with available literature in meta-analysis. Last, we assessed statins' anti-lipid and anti-inflammatory effects in 3D cultured human liver organoids and THP-1 macrophages, respectively. Findings: Statin use was inversely associated with NAFLD in the Rotterdam study compared to participants with untreated dyslipidemia. In the PERSONS cohort, statin use was inversely associated with NASH, but not with fibrosis. The meta-analysis included 7 studies and indicated a not significant inverse association for statin use with NAFLD (pooled-Odds Ratio: 0.69, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.46-1.01) and significant inverse associations with NASH (pooled-OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.44-0.79) and fibrosis (pooled-OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.33-0.70). In vitro, statins significantly reduced lipid droplet accumulation in human liver organoids and downregulated expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines in macrophages. Interpretation: Pooled results demonstrated that statin use was associated with a lower prevalence of NASH and fibrosis and might prevent NAFLD. This may be partially attributed to the anti-lipid and anti-inflammatory characteristics of statins. Given their under-prescription, adequate prescription of statins may limit the disease burden of NAFLD. Funding: ZonMw, KWF, NWO, SLO, DGXII, RIDE, National and regional government, Erasmus MC and Erasmus University.
Efficacy and safety of lowering LDL cholesterol in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Baris Gencer,Nicholas A Marston,KyungAh Im,Christopher P Cannon,Peter Sever,Anthony Keech,Eugene Braunwald,Robert P Giugliano,Marc S Sabatine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32332-1

IF: 202.731

2020-11-01

The Lancet

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of LDL cholesterol lowering treatment in older patients remains debated. We aimed to summarise the evidence of LDL cholesterol lowering therapies in older patients.METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE and Embase for articles published between March 1, 2015, and Aug 14, 2020, without any language restrictions. We included randomised controlled trials of cardiovascular outcomes of an LDL cholesterol-lowering drug recommended by the 2018 American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines, with a median follow-up of at least 2 years and data on older patients (aged ≥75 years). We excluded trials that exclusively enrolled participants with heart failure or on dialysis because guidelines do not recommend lipid-lowering therapy in such patients who do not have another indication. We extracted data for older patients using a standardised data form for aggregated study-level data. We meta-analysed the risk ratio (RR) for major vascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or other acute coronary syndrome, stroke, or coronary revascularisation) per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol.FINDINGS: Data from six articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, which included 24 trials from the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration meta-analysis plus five individual trials. Among 244 090 patients from 29 trials, 21 492 (8·8%) were aged at least 75 years, of whom 11 750 (54·7%) were from statin trials, 6209 (28·9%) from ezetimibe trials, and 3533 (16·4%) from PCSK9 inhibitor trials. Median follow-up ranged from 2·2 years to 6·0 years. LDL cholesterol lowering significantly reduced the risk of major vascular events (n=3519) in older patients by 26% per 1 mmol/L reduction in LDL cholesterol (RR 0·74 [95% CI 0·61-0·89]; p=0·0019), with no statistically significant difference with the risk reduction in patients younger than 75 years (0·85 [0·78-0·92]; pinteraction=0·37). Among older patients, RRs were not statistically different for statin (0·82 [0·73-0·91]) and non-statin treatment (0·67 [0·47-0·95]; pinteraction=0·64). The benefit of LDL cholesterol lowering in older patients was observed for each component of the composite, including cardiovascular death (0·85 [0·74-0·98]), myocardial infarction (0·80 [0·71-0·90]), stroke (0·73 [0·61-0·87]), and coronary revascularisation (0·80 [0·66-0·96]).INTERPRETATION: In patients aged 75 years and older, lipid lowering was as effective in reducing cardiovascular events as it was in patients younger than 75 years. These results should strengthen guideline recommendations for the use of lipid-lowering therapies, including non-statin treatment, in older patients.FUNDING: None.

medicine, general & internal
NHS health checks may have prevented 8400 heart attacks and strokes over five years

Susan Mayor

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6796

2016-01-01

Abstract:The NHS Health Check programme has prevented an estimated 4600-8400 myocardial infarctions, strokes, or deaths due to these causes over the past five years by increasing statin use and improving diagnosis and treatment of diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease, an observational study has found.1The programme, which started in 2009, offers a free health check to all adults aged 40-74 to help identify those at highest risk of cardiovascular disease and new comorbidities and to offer treatment, support, and advice on behavioural change. But researchers and politicians have questioned its evidence base.2 3 4 …
Results of Investigation into Statin Side Effects Due by End of Year

Nigel Hawkes

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h957

2015-01-01

BMJ

Abstract:The Cholesterol Treatment Trials Collaboration plans to produce tabulated results of all the side effects recorded in 30 randomised controlled trials of statins by the end of this year, the Oxford University expert Rory Collins told a briefing at the Science Media Centre in London this week. But he did not expect the results to “materially alter the evidence,” which he said strongly favoured statins. “It may reassure some people,” he said. “We thought it was necessary to get the …
Statin initiation is unrelated to cardiovascular risk score, finds study.

Hawkes Nigel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4898

2017-01-01

Abstract:General practices in England and Wales start patients on statins seemingly haphazardly, often without documented evidence that their cardiovascular risks have been properly assessed, a study of 248 practices has shown.GPs are recommended by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to use the QRISK2 score to help decide whether patients should be started on statins. But only around a quarter of patients who began taking the drugs after 2012, when this recommendation was made, have a QRISK2 score documented in their patient record. And of those who do have a score recorded, only 35% of those with a high score were actually started on statins, found Samuel Finnikin and colleagues …
[Value and role of lipid lowering therapy for cardiovascular prevention in the elderly].

F. Philippe

Annales de Cardiologie et d'Angeiologie

Abstract:Most of elderly people die of coronary and cerebrovascular disease events or become disabled after non fatal stroke or dementia. Most of evidence of benefits shown in both primary and secondary prevention comes from randomized trials done on middle-aged men. The elderly population exposed to major cardiovascular events and dementia regularly increase due to the lengthening of life expectancy. If the benefit of anti-hypertensives agents is now well-established in isolated systolic hypertension in the elderly, evidence of efficacy with statins remained unclear and needed to be investigated. Observational studies and post-hoc analysis of randomized trials have raised the possibility that statins could reduce the rate of cardiovascular events and the rate of dementia in elderly individuals. In this setting occur the results of two recent trials investigated the effects of simvastatin in a high cardiovascular risk population of whom 30% were aged 70 or older (Heart Protection Study), or the effects of pravastatin for primary or secondary prevention in high risk elderly patients with a middle-age of 75 (Prosper). Major cardiovascular events are significantly reduced in both trials but the relative risk reduction is lower than in previous trials in middle-aged patients. In Prosper, the most beneficial group of patients are those with baseline HDL cholesterol under 0.40 g l-1 (1.1 mmol l-1); coronary heart disease events is the principal component of treatment benefit whereas cerebrovascular events are not significantly reduced at 3-years follow-up probably due to the short duration of the trial. The outcome do not provide evidence for benefit in dementia. However, there is a non significant trend to reduction of transient ischaemic attacks. Recent publications suggest that stroke benefit from statins does not begin to appear until after 3 years of treatment. Hence, those evidence suggests that the strategy for vascular risk management in middle aged people should also be applied to elderly individuals with a greatest benefit in the subgroup with the lowest HDL cholesterol.

Medicine

Could Giving Statins to over 75s Really Save 8000 Lives a Year?

US Task Force Recommends Statins in Healthy People Despite Limited Benefits

NICE Guidelines Could Put 12 Million UK Adults on Statins

Association of statin use in older people primary prevention group with risk of cardiovascular events and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Statins for Primary Prevention in Older People Do Not Cut Mortality or Chd Events, Study Finds

Who should receive a statin these days? Lessons from recent clinical trials

Benefits of Statins Have Been Underestimated and Harms Overstated, Review Finds

Lifetime effects and cost-effectiveness of statin therapy for older people in the United Kingdom: a modelling study

Six Professors Back NICE Guidance on Extending Use of Statins.

Statins in Primary Prevention in People Over 80 Years

Statin utilization and cardiovascular outcomes in a real-world primary prevention cohort of older adults

Lifetime effects and cost-effectiveness of standard and higher-intensity statin therapy across population categories in the UK: a microsimulation modelling study

NICE Sticks to Its Advice to Drop Threshold for Prescribing Statins

Study Links Negative News Stories about Statins to Patients' Likelihood of Giving Them Up.

Determining Cost-Saving Risk Thresholds for Statin Use

Dissecting the multifaceted impact of statin use on fatty liver disease: a multidimensional study

Efficacy and safety of lowering LDL cholesterol in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

NHS health checks may have prevented 8400 heart attacks and strokes over five years

Results of Investigation into Statin Side Effects Due by End of Year

Statin initiation is unrelated to cardiovascular risk score, finds study.

[Value and role of lipid lowering therapy for cardiovascular prevention in the elderly].