Trial reportJournal of the American College of Cardiology2004
Clinical outcomes in managed-care patients with coronary heart disease treated aggressively in lipid-lowering disease management clinics: the alliance study.
Trial report in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 91 papers, 27 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Prospective, Double-blinded, Randomised Study to Evaluate the Effects of Different Doses of Statin Treatment on Plaque Volume and Composition in Coronary Disease Determined by Virtual Histology Using Intravascular Ultrasound
French Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome With or Without ST Elevation
Who cites it
91 citing papers in PubMed, 27 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Statins for the primary prevention of venous thromboembolism.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Benefits and Risks of Antihyperlipidemic Medication in Adults with Different Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Based on the Number Needed to Treat.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2024 · on this mapPooled it
- Lipid-Lowering Therapy and Risk of Hemorrhagic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024 · on this mapPooled it
- HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for people with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- The association of statin therapy and cancer: a meta-analysis.Lipids in health and disease · 2023 · on this mapPooled it
- Lipid-Lowering Trials Are Not Representative of Patients Managed in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Exclusion Criteria.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Pooled it
- A statistical method for removing unbalanced trials with multiple covariates in meta-analysis.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Harmonisation of large-scale, heterogeneous individual participant adverse event data from randomised trials of statin therapy.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2022Pooled it
- Prevalence of statin intolerance: a meta-analysis.European heart journal · 2022 · on this mapPooled it
- Comparative Effect of Statins and Omega-3 Supplementation on Cardiovascular Events: Meta-Analysis and Network Meta-Analysis of 63 Randomized Controlled Trials Including 264,516 Participants.Nutrients · 2020 · on this mapPooled it
- Impact of Lipid-Lowering Therapy on Mortality According to the Baseline Non-HDL Cholesterol Level: A Meta-Analysis.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2019Pooled it
- 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.Circulation · 2019 · on this mapGuideline
- Legacy effects of statins on cardiovascular and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2018 · on this mapPooled it
- Association Between Baseline LDL-C Level and Total and Cardiovascular Mortality After LDL-C Lowering: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA · 2018 · on this mapPooled it
- A Systematic Review of Cardiovascular Outcomes-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lipid-Lowering Therapies.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Pooled it
- Safety Profile of Atorvastatin 80 mg: A Meta-Analysis of 17 Randomized Controlled Trials in 21,910 Participants.Drug safety · 2016Pooled it
- Intensified low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol target of statin therapy and cancer risk: a meta-analysis.Lipids in health and disease · 2015Pooled it
- The effect of statin therapy on heart failure events: a collaborative meta-analysis of unpublished data from major randomized trials.European heart journal · 2015 · on this mapPooled it
- 2013 ACC/AHA guideline on the treatment of blood cholesterol to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.Circulation · 2014 · on this mapGuideline
- Statins for the prevention of stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
31 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study sought to determine if an aggressive, focused low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)-lowering strategy was superior to usual care for coronary heart disease (CHD) patients enrolled in health maintenance organization or Veterans Administration settings.
backgroundStatin therapy benefits are well established. No prospective, randomized studies have tested strategies to optimize these benefits in a "real-world" setting.
methodsA total of 2,442 CHD patients with hyperlipidemia were randomized to either an aggressive treatment arm using atorvastatin or usual care and followed for 51.5 months on average. Atorvastatin-group patients were titrated to LDL-C goals of <80 mg/dl (2.1 mmol/l) or a maximum atorvastatin dose of 80 mg/day. Usual-care patients received any treatment deemed appropriate by their regular physicians. End point assessments were complete in 958 atorvastatin-group and 941 usual-care patients. Partial assessments occurred in 259 patients in the atorvastatin group and 284 patients in the usual care group who did not complete four years of study participation because of adverse events, withdrawn consent, or follow-up loss. The primary efficacy parameter was time to first cardiovascular event.
resultsA total of 289 (23.7%) patients in the atorvastatin group compared with 333 (27.7%) patients in the usual care group experienced a primary outcome (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 0.97, p = 0.02). This reduction in morbidity was largely due to fewer non-fatal myocardial infarctions (4.3% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.0002). Levels of LDL-C were reduced more (34.3% vs. 23.3%, p < 0.0001) and National Cholesterol Education Program goals (LDL-C <100 mg/dl) more likely met at end-of-study visits (72.4% vs. 40.0%) in patients receiving atorvastatin compared with those receiving usual care.
conclusionsAn aggressive, focused statin therapy management strategy outperformed usual care in health maintenance organization and Veterans Administration clinic patients with CHD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15519006What 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.