Observational studyPloS one2018
Impact of pre-existing treatment with statins on the course and outcome of tick-borne encephalitis.
Observational study in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Spectrum and Dynamics of Sequelae Following Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus Infection: A Systematic Literature Review.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Do Statins Affect Viral Infections Encountered by International Travelers?Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
- New Approaches to the Prevention and Treatment of Viral Diseases.Archivum immunologiae et therapiae experimentalis · 2021Review
- Effect of Statin Use on the Clinical Manifestations, Laboratory Test Results and Outcome of Lyme Neuroborreliosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough statins have anti-inflammatory and potentially also antimicrobial (including antiviral) activity, their therapeutic impact on infectious diseases is controversial. In this study, we evaluated whether pre-existing statin use influenced the course and outcome of tick-borne encephalitis.
methodsTo assess the influence of statin usage on the severity of acute illness and the outcome of tick-borne encephalitis, univariate and multivariable analyses were performed for 700 adult patients with tick-borne encephalitis of whom 77 (11%) were being treated with statins, and for 410 patients of whom 53 (13%) were receiving statins, respectively.
resultsMultivariable analyses found no statistically significant association between statin usage and having a milder acute illness. There was also no statistically significant benefit with respect to a favorable outcome defined by the absence of post-encephalitic syndrome (ORs for a favorable outcome at 6 months was 0.96, 95% CI: 0.46-2.04, P = 0.926; at 12 months 0.29, 95% CI: 0.06-1.33, P = 0.111; at 2-7 years after acute illness 0.44, 95% CI: 0.09-2.22, P = 0.321), by a reduction in the frequency of six nonspecific symptoms (fatigue, myalgia/arthralgia memory disturbances, headache, concentration disturbances, irritability) occurring during the 4 week period before the last examination, or by higher SF-36 scores in any of the eight separate domains of health as well as in the physical and mental global overall component. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between patients receiving statins and those who were not in the cerebrospinal fluid or serum levels for any of the 24 cytokines/chemokines measured.
conclusionsIn this observational study, we could not prove that pre-existing use of statins affected either the severity of the acute illness or the long-term outcome of tick-borne encephalitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.