ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Real-world risk assessment of combined cilostazol-rosuvastatin: a retrospective cohort study using Korean electronic health records.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cilostazol and rosuvastatin are frequently co-prescribed for cardiovascular disease management, particularly in Asian populations. Despite widespread clinical use, comprehensive real-world safety data for this drug combination remain limited. Objective: To evaluate the 1-year safety profile of cilostazol-rosuvastatin combination therapy compared with that of cilostazol monotherapy in a real-world Korean population using electronic health records. Methods: This retrospective cohort study utilised the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) Common Data Model from Gachon University Gil Hospital (2004-2025). Patients on stable rosuvastatin therapy (≥90 days) who had cilostazol added to their treatment (n = 262) were compared to cilostazol monotherapy patients (n = 6,323). Primary outcomes were incidence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), bleeding, and myopathy at 90 and 365 days. Secondary outcomes included changes in liver enzyme levels and platelet count. Fisher's exact and Welch's t-tests were used for statistical analyses. Results: The combination group had higher baseline comorbidities compared with the monotherapy group, including chronic kidney disease (45.8% vs. 32.1%), diabetes mellitus (55.0% vs. 29.2%), and concurrent antithrombotic therapy (61.1% vs. 27.9%). At the 365-day follow-up, no primary safety events occurred in the combination group (0/113) versus ASCVD 2/2,307 (0.1%), bleeding 3/2,307 (0.1%), and myopathy 1/2,307 (0.0%) in the monotherapy group (p = 1.00). Laboratory parameters remained stable: AST/ALT change +14.0 vs. +5.7 U/L (p = 0.71), platelet change -8.1 vs. +18.0 ×10 Conclusion: Cilostazol-rosuvastatin combination therapy demonstrated a favourable real-world safety profile despite a higher baseline risk. These findings support the safety of this combination in routine clinical practice.
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.