ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)2007
Statins in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome: an analysis of dose and class effects in typical practice.
Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and persistent physical disability in older adults.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022 · on this mapTrial
- Intensive Statin Therapy in NSTE-ACS Patients Undergoing PCI: Clinical and Biochemical Effects.Texas Heart Institute journal · 2015Trial
- Low-intensity versus moderate- to high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy after myocardial infarction in patients aged 80 years and older: A retrospective cohort study.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- Optimal Medical Therapy Prescription in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome in the Netherlands: A Multicenter Pilot Registry.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2021Article
- Comparative effectiveness of statins in secondary prevention among the older people aged 75 years and over.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2019Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Unmet Need Among Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Stratified by Statin Use.American health & drug benefits · 2016Article
- Supplementing claims data with outpatient laboratory test results to improve confounding adjustment in effectiveness studies of lipid-lowering treatments.BMC medical research methodology · 2012Article
- Role of disease risk scores in comparative effectiveness research with emerging therapies.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2012Article
- Variation in initiating secondary prevention after myocardial infarction by hospitals and physicians, 1997 through 2004.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2011Article
- Statin utilization in nursing home patients after cardiac hospitalization.Journal of general internal medicine · 2010Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of statins of different treatment intensity used to treat elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in typical care settings.
designRetrospective cohort study using linked hospital and pharmacy claims data.
settingStatewide pharmacy benefits programmes in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
participants18,311 Medicare patients discharged alive after ACS who received a prescription for a statin within 90 days of hospital discharge.
main outcome measuresUsing multivariable and propensity-matched Cox proportional hazards regression models, patients who were prescribed high-intensity and moderate-intensity statins were compared based on the drug-dose combination that they initially received. Individual drug-dose combinations were also compared. Our primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death or recurrent ACS.
resultsPatients who received moderate-intensity statins were as likely to experience a primary outcome as patients treated with high-intensity statins (adjusted HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.08). Propensity matching did not change the results. Individually, all moderate-intensity statins were as effective as high-intensity atorvastatin with the exception of lovastatin (adjusted HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.36). Similarly, all high-intensity statins seem as effective as high-intensity atorvastatin but the CIs surrounding these estimates were wide.
conclusionsThis analysis of elderly patients with ACS treated in typical care settings does not demonstrate the superiority of high-intensity over moderate-intensity statin treatment or significant differences among individual statins.
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.