Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40747367›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025

Comparative effectiveness and safety of atorvastatin versus rosuvastatin among patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack: a national registry-based observational study.

Jianhua Zhao, Xinya Li, Xue Xia, Xue Tian, Qin Xu, Xiaoli Zhang, Ruobing Tian, Xia Meng, Anxin Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. 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
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Jianhua ZhaoNeurology in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, Henan Institute of Neurology, Henan Joint International Research Laboratory of Neurorestoratology for Senile Dementia, Henan Key Laboratory of Neurorestoratology, Xinxiang, Henan, China.
Xinya LiDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xue XiaDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xue TianDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Qin XuDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xiaoli ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Ruobing TianDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xia MengDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Anxin WangDepartment of Neurology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Atorvastatin and rosuvastatin are the most widely used statins in patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). However, evidence on their effectiveness and safety during actual use is scarce. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of initiating atorvastatin versus rosuvastatin among patients with ischemic stroke or TIA. Methods: This observational study was based on the Third China National Stroke Registry (CNSR-III), which recruited consecutive adult patients with ischemic stroke or TIA within 7 days from the onset of symptoms to enrollment from August 2015 to March 2018. This study identified 3322 adults aged ≥18 years who had a pre-stroke modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0 and initiated atorvastatin or rosuvastatin on the day of onset. The primary outcome was the ideal outcome, as defined by a mRS score of 0, at 3 months. The secondary outcomes included the ideal outcome at discharge, at 6 months, and at 12 months, along with 12-month stroke recurrence, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular events. Findings: A total of 3322 eligible patients were identified, with 2605 initiating atorvastatin and 717 initiating rosuvastatin. The proportion of patients achieving an ideal outcome, as defined by a modified Rankin Scale of 0, was 44.63% in rosuvastatin initiators, significantly higher than 41.46% in atorvastatin initiators, with a relative rate of 1.12 (95% confidence interval 1.03, 1.22). Also, a greater percentage of rosuvastatin initiators attained the ideal outcome at discharge and at 6 months, compared with atorvastatin initiators. Regarding other secondary outcomes, no statistically significant difference was observed. Interpretation: Compared with atorvastatin, rosuvastatin was associated with a potentially higher proportion of patients attaining a mRS score of 0 among patients with ischemic stroke or TIA who initiate atorvastatin or rosuvastatin, which was not yet sufficient to guide clinical practice. Further research is needed to validate these findings. Funding: This work was supported by National Key Research and Development Program of China (2022YFC2502400, 2022YFC2502404), Beijing Natural Science Foundation Haidian original innovation joint fund (L222123), and Youth Innovation Fund of Beijing Neurosurgical Institute (2025 Reform and Development-Youth 15).

Indexed as

AtorvastatinIschemic strokeObservational studyRosuvastatinTransient ischemic attack

Identifiers

PMID40747367
PMCPMC12311946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.