Trial reportCardiovascular diabetology2024

Effect of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus in patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease: a post-hoc analysis from the LODESTAR randomized clinical trial.

Sung-Jin Hong, Yong-Joon Lee, Woong Chol Kang, Bum-Kee Hong, Jong-Young Lee, Jin-Bae Lee, Tae-Hyun Yang, Junghan Yoon, Seung-Jun Lee, Chul-Min Ahn and 7 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2024. The graph read 1 number from its abstract, feeding 1 cell of the map, but none could be read as for or against, so it casts no vote. It reports registered trial NCT02579499. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

1number the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

Read, but not usablea number the graph found but could not read as for or against

Lipidscomparator not stated · dyslipidemia, ascvdfeeds one cell of the map
HR 1.791.18 to 2.73P = 0.007
The incidence of NODM was significantly greater in the rosuvastatin group than it was in the atorvastatin group when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL (13.9% versus 8.0%; HR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.73, P = 0.007).

clause the extractor read what became the number

2 · Its place on the map

Where it lands on the map

Rows are treatments, columns are outcomes. The coloured squares are the cells this paper feeds, coloured by the vote it casts there. Click one to jump to what this paper adds to it.

supports the treatmentfavours the comparatorno clear differenceread, but no usable result
3 · What it changes

What it adds to each cell

For every cell the paper feeds: the belief in the claim with and without this paper, and this paper's estimate drawn against every other readable study in the cell. The ringed dot is this paper.

Statins×lipids

No readable resultOpen on the map →What to test next →

38 readable studies in this cell: 28 favour the treatment, 4 find no difference, 6 favour the comparator.

Belief with this paper
0.50contested · 21 families support, 7 contradict · against placebo
Without itNot a counted family in this claim, so removing it changes nothing.
← favours the treatmentfavours the comparator →
0 · no effect
NCT002899002,340 enrolled · 2006
Δ -13.2-16.8 to -9.60
reduced -66.0-73.0 to -58.0
NCT02546323543 enrolled · 2015
Δ -35.5-40.2 to -30.7
NCT01678820299 enrolled · 2012
Δ 0.50-4.80 to 5.80
NCT01218204287 enrolled · 2010
Δ 5.47-15.7 to 26.7
NCT0093525931 enrolled · 2009
Δ -51.7
reductions -33.6-38.8 to -28.4

This paper's own estimate is on a different scale from the rest of the cell, so it is not drawn here.

4 · The registry

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.

NCT02579499 phase4unknown status

Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol-targeting Statin Therapy Versus the Intensity-based Statin Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: a Randomized Comparison Trial

Ran2016Enrolled4,400Registered outcomes2Posted comparisons0ConditionsCoronary Artery DiseasseArmsfixed high potent statin therapy, targeted LDL-C goal statin
Open the trial in the graph
5 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Impact ofBiomedicines · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
6 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

7 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Sung-Jin Hong *Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Yong-Joon Lee *Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Woong Chol KangGachon University College of Medicine, Incheon, Korea.
Bum-Kee HongGangnam Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Jong-Young LeeKangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jin-Bae LeeDaegu Catholic University Medical Center, Daegu, Korea.
Tae-Hyun YangInje University Busan Paik Hospital, Busan, Korea.
Junghan YoonWonju Severance Christian Hospital, Wonju, Korea.
Seung-Jun LeeSeverance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Chul-Min AhnSeverance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jung-Sun KimSeverance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Byeong-Keuk KimSeverance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Young-Guk KoSeverance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Donghoon ChoiSeverance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Yangsoo JangCHA University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Korea.
Myeong-Ki HongSeverance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. mkhong61@yuhs.ac.
LODESTAR investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

8 · The paper itself

Abstract

The marked sentences are the ones the graph read a number from.

backgroundThe impact of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) among patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease (CAD) remains to be clarified. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of NODM in patients with CAD treated with rosuvastatin compared to atorvastatin in the randomized LODESTAR trial.

methodsIn the LODESTAR trial, patients with CAD were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin or atorvastatin using a 2-by-2 factorial randomization. In this post-hoc analysis, the 3-year incidence of NODM was compared between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin treatment in the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy as the principal population of interest.

resultsAmong 2932 patients without diabetes mellitus at baseline, 2377 were included in the as-treated population analysis. In the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between the rosuvastatin and atorvastatin groups (11.4% [106/948] versus 8.8% [73/856], hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98 to 1.77, P = 0.071). When the risk of NODM with rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin was assessed according to the achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level, the risk of NODM began to increase at a LDL-C level below 70 mg/dL. The incidence of NODM was significantly greater in the rosuvastatin group than it was in the atorvastatin group when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL (13.9% versus 8.0%; HR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.73, P = 0.007).

conclusionsAmong CAD patients receiving high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. However, a drug effect of the statin type on NODM was observed when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02579499.

Indexed as

AtorvastatinCoronary Artery DiseaseDiabetes MellitusHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsRosuvastatin CalciumAgedBiomarkersFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeAtorvastatinBiomarkersHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsRosuvastatin CalciumCoronary artery diseaseDiabetes mellitusStatin

Identifiers

PMID39113067
PMCPMC11304915

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.