ArticleScientific reports2021
Similar major cardiovascular outcomes between pure statin and ezetimibe-statin in comparable intensity for type 2 diabetes with extremely atherosclerotic risks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cardiovascular outcomes and adverse drug reactions associated with the use of ezetimibe in combination with a statin in diabetes mellitus patients with higher risk for myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026 · on this mapPooled it
- The clinical effectiveness and safety of low/moderate-intensity statins & ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atorvastatin 40 mg (ATOR 40) and ezetimibe 10 mg/simvastatin 20 mg (EZ-SIM 20) have similar reductions of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) but cardiovascular (CV) outcomes between these two therapies are unclear. Our real-world cohort study is to test the hypothesis of pleiotropic effects of purely higher dose statin on CV outcomes beyond similar reductions of LDL-C, especially for extremely CV risk patients. Between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2013, a total of 3,372 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) admitted due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or acute ischemic stroke (AIS) were selected as the study cohort from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by ATOR 40 group (n = 1686) matched with EZ-SIM 20 group (n = 1686). Primary composite outcome includes CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke. Secondary composite outcome includes hospitalization for unstable angina (HUA), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). With a mean follow-up of 2.4 years, no significant difference of primary composite outcome was observed between ATOR 40 and EZ-SIM 20 groups (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.25). Nevertheless, ATOR 40 group had lower risks of HUA (SHR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35-0.72), PCI (SHR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.97) and CABG (SHR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.97) than EZ-SIM 20 group. For T2DM patients after ACS or AIS, ATOR 40 and EZ-SIM 20 had similar major CV outcomes, which still supported the main driver for CV risk reductions is LDL-C lowering.
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.