Return to Vaccination News Home Page __» Right-click to "open in new window"
Subscribe to the Vaccination NewsLetter
View past & current Scandals (columns by Sandy Mintz)
Search This Site using keywords
http://www.ti.ubc.ca/pages/letter48.htm
Click here to download a printable version of this Therapeutics Letter in Adobe Acrobat PDF format (86 KB).
Two important questions regarding statin therapy are:
Three new randomized
controlled trials1-3,
which help answer the first question and one trial providing insight into the
second question have been published since our last Letter on lipid lowering
therapy (#42).
This Letter addresses the first question and the next Letter (#49)
will address the second.
Estimating the overall health impact of statins in primary prevention requires
balancing possible benefits and possible harms. In this Letter benefit is
estimated by combining two cardiovascular serious adverse events known to be
reduced by statins in secondary prevention trials: total myocardial infarction
(fatal and non-fatal)5
and total stroke (fatal and non-fatal).6
The balance between benefit and harm (overall health impact) is estimated by
total mortality and total serious adverse events. Serious adverse events
include any untoward medical occurrence that results in death, is life
threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, or
results in persistent or significant disability.
PROSPER studied the effect of pravastatin compared to placebo in two older populations of patients: 56% primary prevention (no past or symptomatic cardiovascular disease) and 44% secondary prevention (past or symptomatic cardiovascular disease) (Table 1). Pravastatin did not reduce total myocardial infarction or total stroke in the primary prevention population, RR 0.94 [0.78 – 1.14], but did so in the secondary prevention population, RR 0.80 [0.68 – 0.94], ARR 4.3%, NNT 23 for 3.2 years. Measures of overall health impact in the combined populations, total mortality and total serious adverse events, were unchanged by pravastatin as compared to placebo, RR 0.98 [0.84 – 1.14] and 1.01 [0.96 – 1.06], respectively.
Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering
Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-LLT)2
ALLHAT-LLT was
designed to determine whether pravastatin compared with usual care reduces
all-cause mortality in older, moderately hypercholesterolemic, hypertensive
patients with at least 1 additional coronary heart disease risk factor. The
published data is for the whole population, 86% of which was primary prevention.
Pravastatin did not reduce total myocardial infarction and total stroke, RR 0.91
[0.82 – 1.01]. Pravastatin also did not reduce total mortality, RR 0.99 [0.89 –
1.09]. Total serious adverse events were not reported.
Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes
Trial—Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA)3
ASCOT-LLA was designed to assess the benefits of atorvastatin versus
placebo in hypertensive patients with average or lower-than-average cholesterol
concentrations and at least 3 other cardiovascular risk factors. The published
data is for the whole population, 82% of which was primary prevention. The trial
was originally planned for 5 years, but was stopped after a median follow-up of
3.3 years because of a significant reduction in cardiac events. Atorvastatin
reduced total myocardial infarction and total stroke, RR 0.82 [0.70 – 0.96], ARR
1.2%, NNT 83. Total mortality was not significantly reduced, RR 0.87 [0.71 –
1.05]. The trial report stated that total serious adverse events “did not differ
between patients assigned atorvastatin or placebo”, but the actual numbers of
serious adverse events were not given.
What is the overall health impact when
statins are prescribed for primary prevention?
To attempt to answer this question we combined the data from the 5
mostly primary prevention trials, the 3 above plus 2 published earlier7,8
(Table 1
& Table 2).
Note that these calculations reflect a population that is 84% primary prevention
and 16% secondary prevention. In the pooled data the statins reduced the
cardiovascular measures, total myocardial infarction and total stroke, by 1.4%
as compared to control. This value indicates that 71 mostly primary prevention
patients would have to be treated for 3 to 5 years to prevent one such event.
This can be compared with the same pooled outcome in 4 large secondary
prevention statin trials, ARR 4.8%, NNT 21 for 5 years. (Letter
#42, HPS4)
In the 2 trials where serious adverse events are reported, the 1.8% absolute
reduction in myocardial infarction and stroke should be reflected by a similar
absolute reduction in total serious adverse events; myocardial infarction and
stroke are, by definition, serious adverse events. However, this is not the
case; serious adverse events are similar in the statin group, 44.2%, and the
control group, 43.9% (Table 2).
This is consistent with the possibility that unrecognized serious adverse events
are increased by statin therapy and that the magnitude of the increase is
similar to the magnitude of the reduction in cardiovascular serious adverse
events in these populations. This hypothesis needs to be tested by analysis of
total serious adverse event data in both past and future statin trials. Serious
adverse event data is available to trial authors, drug companies and drug
regulators. The other measure of overall impact, total mortality, is available
in all 5 trials and is not reduced by statin therapy (Table 2).
If cardiovascular serious adverse events are viewed in isolation, 71 primary prevention patients with cardiovascular risk factors have to be treated with a statin for 3 to 5 years to prevent one myocardial infarction or stroke.
This cardiovascular benefit is not reflected in 2 measures of overall health impact, total mortality and total serious adverse events. Therefore, statins have not been shown to provide an overall health benefit in primary prevention trials.
RR = Relative Risk. CI = Confidence Interval. ARR =
Absolute Risk Reduction.
NNT = Number Needed to Treat to prevent one event.
Table 1: Characteristics of the 5 major statin primary prevention trials
| Trial | Drug Name | Trade Name | Dose mg/day | N | Average age (yr) | % male | % Primary Prevention | Baseline mean Tchol. (mmol/L) | D mean Tchol* |
| PROSPER1 | pravastatin | Pravachol©, generic | 40 | 5,804 | 75 | 48 | 56 | 5.7 | -19 |
| ALLHAT-LLT2 | pravastatin | Pravachol©, generic | 40 | 10,355 | 66 | 51 | 86 | 5.8 | -11 |
| ASCOT-LLA3 | atorvastatin | Lipitor© | 10 | 10,305 | 63 | 81 | 82 | 5.5 | -24 |
| AFCAPS7 | lovastatin | Mevacor©, generic | 20-40 | 6,605 | 58 | 85 | 100 | 5.7 | -19 |
| WOSCOP8 | pravastatin | Pravachol©, generic | 40 | 6,595 | 55 | 100 | 92 | 7.0 | -20 |
* % reduction in the statin group minus the control group after 1 to 2 years of therapy.
N = total number of patients in trial
D = change
Table 2: Meta-analysis of major outcomes from the 5 statin primary prevention trials
| Outcome | Statin | Control | RR [95% CI] | ARR | NNT (3-5 yr) | |||||
| 5 trials | 2 trials* | 5 trials | 2 trials* | 5 trials | 2 trials* | 5 trials | 2 trials* | 5 trials | 2 trials* | |
| Total mortality | 6.6 | 6.1 | 6.9 | 6.2 | 0.95 [0.88-1.02] | 0.99 [0.87-1.14] | ||||
| Total MI and stroke | 7.3 | 8.0 | 8.7 | 9.8 | 0.84 [0.78-0.90] | 0.82 [0.73-0.92] | 1.4 | 1.8 | 71 | 56 |
| Total SAEs* | 44.2 | 43.9 | 1.01 [0.97-1.05] | |||||||
* AFCAPS7 and PROSPER1
MI = Myocardial Infarction
SAEs = Serious Adverse Events
| This Therapeutics Letter contains an assessment and synthesis of publications up to May 2003. We attempt to maintain the accuracy of the information contained in the Therapeutics Letter by extensive literature searches and verification by both the authors and the editorial board. In addition this Therapeutics Letter was submitted for review to 45 experts and primary care physicians in order to correct any identified shortcomings or inaccuracies and to ensure that the information is concise and relevant to clinicians. |
Shepherd J, Blauw GJ, Murphy MB, et al. PROSPER study group. Pravastatin in elderly individuals at risk of vascular disease (PROSPER): a randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:1623-1630.
The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group. Major Outcomes in moderately hypercholesterolemic, hypertensive patients randomized to pravastatin vs usual care: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-LLT). JAMA 2002;288:2998-3007.
Sever PS, Dhalof B, Poulter NR, et al. ASCOT investigators. Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hypertensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial—Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2003;361:1149-1158.
Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360:7-22.
Maron DJ, Fazio S, Linton MF. Current perspectives on statins. Circulation 2000;101:207-213.
Crouse JR 3rd., Byington RP, Furberg CD. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor therapy and stroke risk reduction: an analysis of clinical trials data. [erratum appears in Atherosclerosis 1998;140:193-4]. Atherosclerosis 1998;138:11-24.
Downs JR, Clearfield M, Weis S, et al. Primary prevention of acute coronary events with lovastatin in men and women with average cholesterol levels: results of AFCAPS/TexCAPS. JAMA 1998;279:1615-1622.
Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, et al. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med 1995; 333:1301-1307.
Please send feedback!
Back to Therapeutics Letter.
Back
to the
Therapeutics Initiative Home Page.
©Therapeutics Initiative. Last updated: July 7, 2003.
Return to Vaccination News Home Page __» Right-click to "open in new window"
DISCLAIMER: All information, data, and material contained, presented, or provided here is for general information purposes only and is not to be construed as reflecting the knowledge or opinions of the publisher, and is not to be construed or intended as providing medical or legal advice. The decision whether or not to vaccinate is an important and complex issue and should be made by you, and you alone, in consultation with your health care provider.