Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16216864›Full record

ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)2006

Effect of statins on the mortality of patients with ischaemic heart disease: population based cohort study with nested case-control analysis.

J Hippisley-Cox, C Coupland

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Autophagy, myocardial protection, and the metabolic syndrome.Journal of cardiovascular pharmacology · 2012
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Sex differences in the effectiveness of statins after myocardial infarction.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2007
    Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J Hippisley-CoxUniversity of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. julia.hippisley-cox@nottingham.ac.uk
C Coupland
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo measure the effect of statins on mortality for community based patients with ischaemic heart disease and determine whether the likely benefits are similar for women, the elderly, and patients with diabetes.

designOpen prospective cohort study with nested case-control analysis.

setting1.18 million patients registered with 89 practices spread across 23 strategic health authority areas within the UK. All practices had a minimum of eight years of longitudinal data and were contributing to the UK QRESEARCH database. SUBJECTS: All patients with a first diagnosis of ischaemic heart disease between January 1996 and December 2003. OUTCOMES: Adjusted hazard ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for all cause mortality (cohort analysis) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI (case-control analysis) for current use of statins. Adjustments were made for current use of aspirin, beta blockers, and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, co-morbidity (myocardial infarction, diabetes, hypertension, congestive cardiac failure), smoking, body mass index, and quintile of deprivation.

results13,029 patients had a first diagnosis of ischaemic heart disease in the study period giving an incidence rate of 3.38/1000 person years. 2266 patients with ischaemic heart disease died during the 43,460 person years of observation giving an overall mortality rate of 52.1/1000 person years (95% CI 50.0 to 54.3). In the case-control analysis, patients taking statins had a 39% lower risk of death than did patients not taking statins (adjusted OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72) after use of other medication, co-morbidity, smoking, body mass index, and deprivation were taken into account. The benefits found in this study compared favourably with those found in the randomised controlled trials, although the current study population is at higher overall risk. The benefits extend to women, patients with diabetes, and the elderly and can be seen within two years of treatment. Longer duration of usage was associated with lower OR for risk of death with a 19% reduction in risk of death with each additional year of treatment (adjusted OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.86 per year). Mortality was similarly reduced among patients prescribed atorvastatin (adjusted OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.79) and simvastatin (adjusted OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.76).

conclusionsThe benefits of statins found in randomised controlled trials extend to unselected community based patients. The benefits can be seen within the first two years of treatment and continue to accrue over time. Since patients in the community are likely to be at higher risk than those in trials, the potential benefits from statins are likely to be greater than expected.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsCase-Control StudiesChildChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsInfantInfant, NewbornMiddle AgedMyocardial IschemiaProspective StudiesHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID16216864
PMCPMC1860643
OpenAlexW2025047781

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.