ArticleDrug safety2023
Association of Strict Versus Lenient Cholesterol Lowering with Cardiac Outcomes, Diabetes Progression and Complications, and Mortality in Patients with Diabetes Treated with Statins: Is Less More?
Article in Drug safety, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selective statin therapy and nasal staphylococcal colonisation: a retrospective case-control study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Dyslipidemia in Diabetes: Navigating a Complex Landscape for Improved Cardiovascular Outcomes.Clinical medicine insights. Endocrinology and diabetes · 2026Review
- On-Target Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol in Adults with Diabetes Not at High Cardiovascular Disease Risk Predicts Greater Mortality, Independent of Early Deaths or Frailty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Effects of genetically proxied statins on diabetic nephropathy and retinopathy: a Mendelian randomization study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionWhereas some guidelines recommend statin use to achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal < 70 mg/dL for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in patients at higher risk, others recommend against a target LDL-C level. Achieving a target level < 70 mg/dL commonly requires the use of high intensity statins, which has been associated with higher risk of diabetes progression. The objective of this study is to assess the association of strict (≤ 70 mg/dL) versus lenient (> 70 to100 mg/dL) LDL-C lowering on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), diabetes progression, diabetes microvascular complications, and total mortality in patients with diabetes.
methodsThis was a retrospective propensity score (PS)-matched study from a national cohort of, predominantly male, veterans diagnosed with diabetes without prior cardiovascular disease (from fiscal years 2003-2015), who were initiated on a statin. We created PS to match strict (mean LDL-C during follow-up ≤ 70 mg/dL) versus lenient (mean LDL-C during follow up > 70-100 mg/dL) using 65 baseline characteristics including comorbidities, risk scores, medication classes usage, vital signs, and laboratory data. Outcomes included MACE, diabetes progression, microvascular diabetes complications, and total mortality.
resultsFrom 80,110 eligible patients, we PS-matched 21,294 pairs of statin initiators with strict or lenient LDL-C lowering. The mean (SD) age was 64 (9.5) years and mean (SD) duration of follow-up was 6 (3) years. MACE was similar in the PS-matched groups [6.1% in strict versus 5.8% in lenient; odds ratio (OR): 1.06; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.98-1.15, P = 0.17]. Diabetes progression was higher among the strict vs lenient group (66.7% in strict versus 64.1% in lenient; OR 1.12; 95% CI 1.08-1.17, P < 0.001). There was no difference in microvascular diabetes complications (22.3% in strict versus 21.9% in lenient; OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.98-1.07, P = 0.31) and no difference in total mortality (14.6% in strict versus 15% in lenient; OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.92-1.02, P = 0.20).
conclusionStrict compared with lenient lowering of LDL-C with statins in men with diabetes without preexisting ASCVD did not decrease the risk of MACE but was associated with an increased diabetes progression. Clinicians should monitor their patients for diabetes progression upon escalating statins to achieve LDL-C levels ≤ 70 mg/dL.
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.