ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology1999
A comparison of the use, effectiveness and safety of bezafibrate, gemfibrozil and simvastatin in normal clinical practice using the New Zealand Intensive Medicines Monitoring Programme (IMMP).
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapy of Canine Hyperlipidemia with Bezafibrate.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2017Trial
- Adverse drug reactions of non-statin antihyperlipidaemic drugs in China from 1989 to 2019: a national database analysis.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Direct Aryl C-H Amination with Primary Amines Using Organic Photoredox Catalysis.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2017Article
- Balanced pan-PPAR activator bezafibrate in combination with statin: comprehensive lipids control and diabetes prevention?Cardiovascular diabetology · 2012Review
- Effects of bezafibrate on lipid and glucose metabolism in dyslipidemic patients with diabetes: the J-BENEFIT study.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2012Article
- Atherogenic dyslipidemia in metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes: therapeutic options beyond statins.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2006Review
- Statins research unfinished saga: desirability versus feasibility.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2005Article
- Which is the best lipid-modifying strategy in metabolic syndrome and diabetes: fibrates, statins or both?Cardiovascular diabetology · 2004Article
- Discontinuation and switching of therapy after initiation of lipid-lowering drugs: the effects of comorbidities and patient characteristics.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2003Article
- Who receives lipid-lowering drugs: the effects of comorbidities and patient characteristics on treatment initiation.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2003Article
- Signal generation in the New Zealand Intensive Medicines Monitoring Programme: a combined clinical and statistical approach.Drug safety · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsBecause of the importance of treating dyslipidaemia in the prevention of ischaemic heart disease and because patient selection criteria and outcomes in clinical trials do not necessarily reflect what happens in normal clinical practice, we compared outcomes from bezafibrate, gemfibrozil and simvastatin therapy under conditions of normal use.
methodsA random sample of 200 patients was selected from the New Zealand Intensive Medicines Monitoring Programme's (IMMP) patient cohorts for each drug. Questionnaires sent to prescribers requested information on indications, risk factors for ischaemic heart disease, lipid profiles with changes during treatment and reasons for stopping therapy.
results80% of prescribers replied and 83% of these contained useful information. The three groups were similar for age, sex and geographical region, but significantly more patients on bezafibrate had diabetes and/or hypertension than those on gemfibrozil or simvastatin. After treatment and taking the initial measure into account, the changes in serum lipid values were consistent with those generally observed, but with gemfibrozil being significantly less effective than expected. More patients (15.8%S) stopped gemfibrozil because of an inadequate response compared with bezafibrate (5.4%) and simvastatin (1.6%). Gemfibrozil treatment was also withdrawn significantly more frequently due to a possible adverse reaction compared with the other two drugs.
conclusionsIn normal clinical practice in New Zealand gemfibrozil appears less effective and more frequently causes adverse effects leading to withdrawal of treatment than either bezafibrate or simvastatin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.