ArticlePLoS medicine2026
Cardiovascular outcomes and safety associated with statin therapy for primary prevention in older adults with type 2 diabetes: A target trial emulation study.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is limited evidence on the use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in older adults with type 2 diabetes due to underrepresentation of this population in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aimed to determine the effectiveness and safety of statin therapy for primary CVD prevention among type 2 diabetes patients aged ≥75 years. METHODS AND
findingsIn this cohort study, territory-wide electronic health records (EHRs) from the Hospital Authority Clinical Management System in Hong Kong were used to emulate a sequence of nested target trials. Eligible patients were included in a rolling basis in each calendar month from January 2009 to December 2015, and thus we emulated 84 'nested monthly trials'. In each monthly trial, all type 2 diabetes patients aged ≥60 years with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (≥2.6 mmol/L) in the baseline calendar month were included; patients with a history of type 1 diabetes, CVDs, cancers, muscle-related disorders, or liver dysfunction were excluded from analysis. Eligible individuals were classified into statin initiators or noninitiators based on whether they initiated statin therapy at the time of enrollment. They were categorized into various age groups (60-74, 75-84, ≥85 years) for analysis, with those aged 60-74 years forming a benchmark group to test the validity of the emulated target trial. Patients were followed up until the outcome of interest, death, or the administrative end (December 2018), whichever occurred first. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) comparing statin use versus nonuse for CVDs, all-cause mortality, muscle-related adverse events (AEs), and liver dysfunction using pooled logistic models, with inverse probability weighting to adjust for time-varying confounders related to treatment adherence, under the assumption of no unmeasured confounding. Propensity score matching was performed on eligible person-trials at baseline, incorporating demographic characteristics, clinical and laboratory parameters, comorbidities, medication history, and healthcare utilization as matching variables. Among 30,804 matched person-trials aged 75-84 years, a significant reduction in the incidence of CVDs (HR 0.69 (95% CI [0.65, 0.75]; p < 0.001)) and all-cause mortality (0.65 [0.60, 0.70], p < 0.001) was observed. In 3,798 matched person-trials aged ≥85 years, the benefits were consistently observed (CVDs: 0.65 [0.54, 0.77], p < 0.001; all-cause mortality: 0.61 [0.52, 0.71], p < 0.001). No substantially increased risks for muscle-related AEs or liver dysfunction were observed in both age groups. The effectiveness and safety of statins for the benchmark age group (60-74 years) were also confirmed. The remaining source of bias included the potential misclassification bias due to reliance on diagnosis coding in EHRs, as well as unmeasured confounding relating to lifestyle factors, social determinants, and information on the shared decision-making between physicians and patients.
conclusionsIn type 2 diabetes patients aged ≥75 years, we found that statin use was associated with reduced risks of CVDs and all-cause mortality, including those aged over 85 years. No substantially increased risks for muscle-related adverse events and liver dysfunction were observed. Future studies, including RCTs, are warranted to confirm the effectiveness and safety of statin use in older adults with diabetes, and to determine optimal statin dosing and the comparative efficacy of different statin types, thereby improving CVD prevention in this population.
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.