Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22125118›Full record

ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2012

Role of C-reactive protein when prescribing a statin.

Scott Kinlay

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Scott KinlayVA Boston Healthcare System, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02132, USA. scott.kinlay@va.gov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clinical value of measuring C-reactive protein (CRP) to guide statin therapy is uncertain. It has no value in patients at high risk who would be treated regardless of CRP (eg, patients with coronary disease or of equivalent risk), in patients at low risk who do not warrant treatment, and those with other acute or chronic inflammatory conditions that amplify CRP. Drawbacks to the widespread clinical use of CRP include its small impact on risk prediction beyond other risk factors, and evidence from JUPITER and other trials that baseline CRP is unable to identify patients who obtain greater absolute benefits from statin therapy. Furthermore, the within-person variability of CRP is about the same as the reduction in CRP from intensive statin therapy, and this leads to many patients registering an increase in CRP with treatment. For these reasons, CRP has no clear role in determining who should receive statin therapy or for monitoring the success of treatment.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicBiomarkersCardiovascular DiseasesC-Reactive ProteinDrug PrescriptionsHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsIncidenceRisk FactorsSecondary PreventionBiomarkersC-Reactive ProteinHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
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.