Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30311434›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2018

Introducing the 'Drucebo' effect in statin therapy: a systematic review of studies comparing reported rates of statin-associated muscle symptoms, under blinded and open-label conditions.

Peter E Penson, G B John Mancini, Peter P Toth, Seth S Martin, Gerald F Watts, Amirhossein Sahebkar, Dimitri P Mikhailidis, Maciej Banach, Lipid and Blood Pressure Meta-Analysis Collaboration (LBPMC) Group & International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP)

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Prevalence of statin intolerance: a meta-analysis.European heart journal · 2022 · on this map
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Drucebo effect in occupational therapy: A double-edged phenomenon.The British journal of occupational therapy · 2025
    Article
  10. Are statin side effects dependent on sex? A narrative review.Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Unseen adversary: Navigating the drucebo effect in neurological treatments.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Hacking the Predictive Mind.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Peter E PensonSchool of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.
G B John ManciniDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Peter P TothJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Seth S MartinJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Heart Disease, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Gerald F WattsLipid Disorders Clinic, Cardiovascular Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital, School of Medicine and Pharmacology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia.
Amirhossein SahebkarBiotechnology Research Center, Pharmaceutical Technology Institute, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Dimitri P MikhailidisDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Royal Free Hospital Campus, University College London, London, UK.
Maciej BanachDepartment of Hypertension, Chair of Nephrology and Hypertension, Medical University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6690-6874
Lipid and Blood Pressure Meta-Analysis Collaboration (LBPMC) Group & International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP)
Johns Hopkins University · USLiverpool John Moores University · GBMashhad University of Medical Sciences · IRMedical University of Lodz · PLThe Royal Free Hospital · GBThe University of Western Australia · AUUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 'placebo effect' and 'nocebo effect' are phenomena whereby beneficial (placebo) or adverse (nocebo) effects result from the expectation that an inert substance will relieve or cause a particular symptom. These terms are often inappropriately applied to effects experienced on drug therapy. Quantifying the magnitude of placebo and nocebo effects in clinical trials is problematic because it requires a 'no treatment' arm. To overcome the difficulties associated with measuring the nocebo effect, and the fact that its definition refers to inert compounds, rather than drugs, we introduce the concept of 'drucebo' (a combination of DRUg and plaCEBO or noCEBO) to relate to beneficial or adverse effects of a drug, which result from expectation and are not pharmacologically caused by the drug. As an initial application of the concept, we have estimated the contribution of the drucebo effect to statin discontinuation and statin-induced muscle symptoms by performing a systematic review of randomized controlled trial of statin therapy.

methodsThis preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis-compliant systematic review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017082700). We searched PubMed and Cochrane Central from inception until 3 January 2018 using a search strategy designed to detect studies including the concepts (Statins AND Placebo AND muscle pain). We included studies that allowed us to quantify the drucebo effect for adverse muscle symptoms of statins by (i) comparing reported rates of muscle symptoms in blinded and unblinded phases of randomized controlled trials and (ii) comparing rates of muscle symptoms at baseline and during blinded therapy in trials that included patients with objectively confirmed statin intolerance at baseline. Extraction was performed by two researchers with disagreements settled by a third reviewer.

resultsFive studies allowed the estimation of the drucebo effect. All trials demonstrated an excess of side effects under open-label conditions. The contribution of the drucebo effect to statin-associated muscle pain ranged between 38% and 78%. The heterogeneity of study methods, outcomes, and reporting did not allow for quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis) of the results.

conclusionsThe drucebo effect may be useful in evaluating the safety and efficacy of medicines. Diagnosis of the drucebo effect in patients presenting with statin intolerance will allow restoration of life-prolonging lipid-lowering therapy. Our study was limited by heterogeneity of included studies and lack of access to individual patient data. Further studies are necessary to better understand risk factors for and clinical management of the drucebo effect.

Indexed as

Nocebo EffectClinical Trials as TopicHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMuscular DiseasesPlacebo EffectPublication BiasRisk FactorsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsDruceboNoceboPlaceboStatins

Identifiers

PMID30311434
PMCPMC6240752
OpenAlexW2902007237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.