Statins Cardiovascular Benefits Outweigh their Diabetogenicity: A Direct Comparison between Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm

Shimoyama S
{"title":"Statins Cardiovascular Benefits Outweigh their Diabetogenicity: A Direct Comparison between Number Needed to Treat and Number Needed to Harm","authors":"Shimoyama S","doi":"10.4172/2167-1052.1000185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Backgrounds: Although there are several metaanalyses showing that the risk of new onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) is more increased in statin or higher dose statin users than placebos or lower dose statin users, a small increase in the risk of NODM would be outweighed by the improved cardiovascular outcomes. However, these metaanalyses are accompanied by limitations of the inclusion of the studies with confounders. The aim of this study is to elucidate the risk-benefit balance by investigating the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) in a simultaneous comparison according to the individual trial-based criteria of NODM and cardiovascular events. \nMethods: A systematic review of the literature retrieves 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing statins vs. placebos and 5 RCTs comparing higher vs. moderate doses of statin. Only RCTs which documented the number of patients who developed DM and who experienced cardiovascular events are included. \nResults: NNH is consistently larger than NNT in trials of statin use vs. placebos, or in trials of higher vs. moderate dose. Furthermore, the benefit-risk ratios are consistently greater than 1 in most trial. \nConclusions: These results suggest that the absolute risk of NODM by statin is offset by the benefit for reducing cardiovascular events. The evaluation of an individual trial-based risk-benefit balance could resolve the limitations of previous studies as well as provide further reinforced evidence that the merit of statin use for the purpose of lowdensity lipoprotein cholesterol lowering outweighs the NODM risk.","PeriodicalId":7385,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"317 1","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-1052.1000185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Backgrounds: Although there are several metaanalyses showing that the risk of new onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) is more increased in statin or higher dose statin users than placebos or lower dose statin users, a small increase in the risk of NODM would be outweighed by the improved cardiovascular outcomes. However, these metaanalyses are accompanied by limitations of the inclusion of the studies with confounders. The aim of this study is to elucidate the risk-benefit balance by investigating the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) in a simultaneous comparison according to the individual trial-based criteria of NODM and cardiovascular events. Methods: A systematic review of the literature retrieves 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing statins vs. placebos and 5 RCTs comparing higher vs. moderate doses of statin. Only RCTs which documented the number of patients who developed DM and who experienced cardiovascular events are included. Results: NNH is consistently larger than NNT in trials of statin use vs. placebos, or in trials of higher vs. moderate dose. Furthermore, the benefit-risk ratios are consistently greater than 1 in most trial. Conclusions: These results suggest that the absolute risk of NODM by statin is offset by the benefit for reducing cardiovascular events. The evaluation of an individual trial-based risk-benefit balance could resolve the limitations of previous studies as well as provide further reinforced evidence that the merit of statin use for the purpose of lowdensity lipoprotein cholesterol lowering outweighs the NODM risk.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
他汀类药物对心血管的益处大于其致糖尿病性:治疗数量与危害数量的直接比较
背景:虽然有几项荟萃分析显示,他汀类药物或高剂量他汀类药物的新发糖尿病(NODM)风险比安慰剂或低剂量他汀类药物的患者增加更多,但NODM风险的小幅增加将被心血管预后的改善所抵消。然而,这些荟萃分析伴随着包含混杂因素的研究的局限性。本研究的目的是通过调查需要治疗的数量(NNT)和需要伤害的数量(NNH)来阐明风险-收益平衡,同时根据基于个体试验的NODM和心血管事件标准进行比较。方法:系统回顾了6项比较他汀类药物与安慰剂的随机对照试验(rct)和5项比较高剂量与中剂量他汀类药物的随机对照试验(rct)。只有记录了糖尿病患者数量和经历心血管事件的随机对照试验被纳入研究。结果:在他汀类药物使用与安慰剂的试验中,或在高剂量与中等剂量的试验中,NNH始终大于NNT。此外,在大多数试验中,获益-风险比始终大于1。结论:这些结果表明,他汀类药物对NODM的绝对风险被其减少心血管事件的益处所抵消。基于个体试验的风险-收益平衡评估可以解决以往研究的局限性,并提供进一步的强化证据,证明他汀类药物用于降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇的优点大于NODM风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Antidepressant: An Overview Quantification of 3?-Acetyl-11-Keto-?-Boswellic Acid and 11-Keto-?Boswellic Acid in the Resin of Boswellia species by HPTLC The Use of 3D Models to Test Potential Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Drugs and Infection Mechanisms Local Drug Delivery in Periodontal Therapy: A Contemporary Review Challenges of Hepatotoxicity Associated with Isoniazid Preventive Therapy among People Living with HIV in Eritrea
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1