Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21798891›Full record

Trial reportEuropean heart journal2012

Evaluation of C-reactive protein prior to and on-treatment as a predictor of benefit from atorvastatin: observations from the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial.

Peter S Sever, Neil R Poulter, Choon L Chang, Aroon Hingorani, Simon A Thom, Alun D Hughes, Paul Welsh, Naveed Sattar, ASCOT Investigators

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European heart journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Overcoming Challenges With Statin Therapy.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2016
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Peter S SeverInternational Centre for Circulatory Health, Imperial College London, 59 North Wharf Road, London, UK. p.sever@imperial.ac.uk
Neil R Poulter
Choon L Chang
Aroon Hingorani
Simon A Thom
Alun D Hughes
Paul Welsh
Naveed Sattar
ASCOT Investigators
London International Development Centre · GBImperial College London · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBThe London College · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/10/005/28147
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsWe tested whether on-statin C-reactive protein is associated with cardiovascular (CV) outcome in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT). METHODS AND

resultsASCOT randomized a subset of 4853 patients with total cholesterol ≤6.5 mmol/L (250 mg/dL) to atorvastatin or placebo. In a case-control study during 5.5-year follow-up, 485 CV cases were age- and sex-matched with 1367 controls. Baseline LDL-cholesterol (LDL-c) and log-transformed C-reactive protein predicted CV events [odds ratio (OR) per 1 standard deviation (SD) 1.31 (95% confidence interval {CI}: 1.10, 1.56), P = 0.002 and OR 1.19 (1.05, 1.34), P = 0.006, respectively]. Including baseline C-reactive protein into a Framingham risk model very modestly improved risk prediction. Baseline C-reactive protein did not indicate the magnitude of the atorvastatin effect on CV outcome (P = 0.54). At 6 months, atorvastatin reduced median LDL-c by 40.3% and median C-reactive protein by 27.4%. In those randomized to atorvastatin, lower on-treatment LDL-c at 6 months was associated with a significant reduction in subsequent CV events [OR 0.41 (0.22, 0.75), P = 0.004] comparing those above and below the median (2.1 mmol/L). In contrast, C-reactive protein below the median (1.83 mg/L) compared with C-reactive protein above the median was not associated with a significant reduction in CV events [OR 0.86 (0.49, 1.51), P = 0.60]. Consequently, addition of on-treatment C-reactive protein to LDL-c did not improve prediction of statin efficacy.

conclusionAmong these hypertensive patients selected on the basis of traditional CV risk factors, C-reactive protein did not usefully improve the prediction of CV events and, critically, reduction in C-reactive protein associated with statin therapy was not a predictor of CV outcome alone or in combination with LDL-c.

Indexed as

AgedAtorvastatinBiomarkersCase-Control StudiesCholesterol, LDLCoronary DiseaseC-Reactive ProteinFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeptanoic AcidsHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsHypercholesterolemiaHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedAtorvastatinBiomarkersCholesterol, LDLC-Reactive ProteinHeptanoic AcidsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsPyrroles

Identifiers

PMID21798891
PMCPMC3279312
OpenAlexW2149991612

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.