Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35695656›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2022

Statin-related adverse drug reactions in UK primary care consultations: A retrospective cohort study to evaluate the risk of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality.

Widya N Insani, Cate Whittlesea, Chengsheng Ju, Kenneth K C Man, Hassan Alwafi, Alaa Alsharif, Sarah Chapman, Li Wei

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Impact of ACEIs and ARBs-related adverse drug reaction on patients' clinical outcomes: a cohort study in UK primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  3. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Widya N InsaniResearch Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0066-9746
Cate WhittleseaResearch Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Chengsheng JuResearch Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Kenneth K C ManResearch Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Hassan AlwafiResearch Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Alaa AlsharifResearch Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Sarah ChapmanDepartment of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Li WeiResearch Department of Practice and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GBDepartment of Health · CNPrincess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University · SAUmm al-Qura University · SAUniversity of Bath · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo investigate the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and all-cause mortality in patients with statin-related adverse drug reaction (ADR) consultation in primary care and examine whether different treatments following the ADR affect subsequent outcomes.

methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of statin users between 2004 and 2019 using IQVIA Medical Research Data (formally known as the THIN database). Patients with statin-related ADR consultation were matched by propensity score (1:1) to statin users without ADR consultation based on demographics, comorbidities and concomitant medication. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to compare the risk of subsequent CVD event and all-cause mortality, stratified by history of CVD. In the secondary analysis among patients with statin-related ADR, treatment changes within a 1-year period following the ADR were examined and the outcomes were compared between different treatment groups.

resultsAmong 1 564 687 statin users, 19 035 (1.22%) had a statin-related ADR consultation in primary care. The mean (standard deviation) follow-up time was 6.32 (3.74) years and 5.31 (3.83) years for CVD primary and secondary prevention cohorts, respectively. Statin-related ADR consultation was associated with subsequent CVD events in both cohorts (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] of 1.39 [95% CI 1.23, 1.57] and 1.34 [95% CI 1.25,1.42], respectively). In the secondary analysis among patients with statin-related ADR consultation, we found that (i) continued statin prescription or combination of any statin with additional lipid-lowering treatment (LLT) and (ii) other LLT only were associated with lower risks of CVD event (adjusted HR 0.71 [95% CI 0.64, 0.78] and 0.75 [95% CI 0.62, 0.92], respectively) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.42, 0.50] and 0.52 [95% CI, 0.43, 0.64], respectively), compared to discontinuation of all LLT.

conclusionStatin-related ADR was associated with an increased risk of subsequent CVD event, indicating that these patients should be monitored more closely. Continued lipid-lowering medication is of importance to protect against CVD events and mortality.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsHumansLipidsPrimary Health CareReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesUnited KingdomHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsLipidsadverse drug reactionscardiovascular eventmortalityprimary carestatin

Identifiers

PMID35695656
PMCPMC9796911
OpenAlexW4282569505

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.