Evidence mapPaperPMID 8106695Full record

Trial reportJournal of the American College of Cardiology1994

Benefits of lipid-lowering therapy in men with elevated apolipoprotein B are not confined to those with very high low density lipoprotein cholesterol.

B F Stewart, B G Brown, X Q Zhao, L A Hillger, A D Sniderman, A Dowdy, L D Fisher, J J Albers

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It reports registered trial NCT00000512. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

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.

2 · 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.

NCT00000512 phase3completed

Familial Atherosclerosis Treatment Study

Ran1984Enrolled146Registered outcomes1Posted comparisons0ConditionsCardiovascular Diseases, Coronary Arteriosclerosis, Coronary Disease, Heart DiseasesArmscolestipol, lovastatin, niacin, Placebo for colestipol, Placebo for lovastatin
Open the trial in the graph
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

B F StewartDepartment of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle.
B G Brown
X Q Zhao
L A Hillger
A D Sniderman
A Dowdy
L D Fisher
J J Albers
University of Washington · USMcGill University · CA

Funding

Serum Amyloid and Inflammation in AtherogenesisP01HL030086 · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · 1985 to 2005
$6.9M
FUNCTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LEFT HEARTR01HL019451 · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · 1985 to 1990
NCRR NIH HHS RR-37NHLBI NIH HHS P01 HL 30086NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL 19451
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDo the benefits of intensive lipid-lowering therapy extend to patients with only borderline or moderately elevated levels of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol?

backgroundThe merits of the present LDL cholesterol treatment goal of < or = 100 mg/dl need to be clarified for patients without high levels of LDL cholesterol, particularly for those patients previously classified as having only borderline high (130 to 159 mg/dl) or desirable (101 to 130 mg/dl) levels.

methodsDisease change and clinical events were examined in LDL cholesterol subgroups in the Familial Atherosclerosis Treatment Study (FATS) trial, a randomized, blinded, quantitative arteriographic comparison of one conventional and two intensive lipid-lowering strategies in men with coronary artery disease, a positive family history and apolipoprotein B > or = 125 mg/dl. The primary end point, disease change per patient, was measured as the mean change in severity of stenosis (delta %SProx) among nine standard proximal segments.

resultsOf the 120 patients completing the 30-month protocol, 60 had a baseline LDL cholesterol < 90th percentile (mean LDL cholesterol 152 mg/dl) and 60 > 90th percentile (mean LDL cholesterol 221 mg/dl). Thirty-one patients had levels < 160 mg/dl (mean LDL cholesterol 134 mg/dl) and 89 > 160 mg/dl (mean LDL cholesterol 205 mg/dl). Patients with LDL cholesterol < 90th percentile benefited angiographically from therapy (delta %SProx = -1.5% diameter stenosis [regression] during intensive therapy vs. +2.3% diameter stenosis [progression] during conventional therapy, p < 0.01), as did patients with LDL cholesterol < 160 mg/dl (delta %SProx = -4.2% vs. +3.3% diameter stenosis, p = 0.0001). By comparison, angiographic benefit was less pronounced among those entering with very high LDL cholesterol (delta %SProx = -0.2% vs. +1.9% diameter stenosis, p = 0.07) or with LDL cholesterol > or = 160 mg/dl (delta %SProx = +0.2% vs. +1.6% diameter stenosis, p = 0.13). Intensive therapy resulted in a statistically significant reduction in clinical events only in the subgroup with baseline LDL cholesterol < 90th percentile (2 of 42 vs. 8 of 29 patients initially enrolled, p = 0.01) and a trend toward fewer events in patients with LDL cholesterol < 160 mg/dl (2 of 20 vs. 6 of 15 patients, p = 0.05). No such difference was seen in the higher LDL cholesterol subgroups.

conclusionsTreatment benefit in the FATS trial was not confined to patients with very high levels of LDL cholesterol and was in fact particularly evident in those patients with levels < 160 mg/dl. Such patients should be considered more likely, not less, to benefit from intensive lipid-lowering therapy.

Indexed as

AdultAnalysis of VarianceAnticholesteremic AgentsApolipoproteins BCholesterol, LDLColestipolCoronary AngiographyCoronary DiseaseDouble-Blind MethodHumansHypercholesterolemiaLovastatinMaleMiddle AgedNiacinTreatment OutcomeAnticholesteremic AgentsApolipoproteins BCholesterol, LDLColestipolLovastatinNiacin

Identifiers

PMID8106695
OpenAlexW2003716709

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.