Cited by 345Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismCholesterol and Lipid Metabolism

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the therapeutic equivalence of statins: Therapeutic equivalence of statins

Open access
Weng, T.-C., Yang, Y.-H. Kao, Lin, S.-J., Tai, S.-H.·2010·Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Statins are the most commonly prescribed agents for hypercholesterolemia because of their efficacy and tolerability. As the number of patients in need of statin therapy continues to increase, information regarding the relative efficacy and safety of statins is required for decision-making. OBJECTIVE: This study will use systematic review to compare the efficacy and safety profiles of different statins at different doses and determine the therapeutically equivalent doses of statins to achieve a specific level of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lowering effect. METHODS: Publications of head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of statins were retrieved from the Oregon state database (1966-2004), MEDLINE (2005-April of 2006), EMBASE (2005-April of 2006), and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry (up to the first quarter of 2006). The publications were evaluated with predetermined criteria by a reviewer before they were included in the review. The mean change in cholesterol level of each statin was calculated and weighted by number of subjects involved in each RCT. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed to generate pooled estimates of the cholesterol lowering effect of statins and the difference between statins. RESULTS: Seventy-five studies reporting RCTs of head-to-head comparisons on statins were included. Most studies had similar baseline characteristics, except the rosuvastatin related studies. A daily dose of atorvastatin 10 mg, fluvastatin 80 mg, lovastatin 40-80 mg, and simvastatin 20 mg could decrease LDL-C by 30-40%, and fluvastatin 40 mg, lovastatin 10-20 mg, pravastatin 20-40 mg, and simvastatin 10 mg could decrease LDL-C by 20-30%. The only two statins that could reduce LDL-C more than 40% were rosuvastatin and atorvastatin at a daily dose of 20 mg or higher. Meta-analysis indicated a statistically significant but clinically minor difference (<7%) between statins in cholesterol lowering effect. Comparisons of coronary heart disease prevention and safety could not be made because of insufficient data. CONCLUSIONS: At comparable doses, statins are therapeutically equivalent in reducing LDL-C.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2710.2009.01085.x

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The degree of LDL cholesterol reduction by statins is dose dependent and varies between different statins.

    “The degree of LDL-C reduction is dose dependent and varies between the different statins (supplementary Figure A and supplementary Table A ). 191”

    From 2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias (2016) · cites this paper as [191]

  • The degree of LDL cholesterol reduction by statins is dose dependent and varies between different statins.

    “The degree of LDL-C reduction is dose dependent and varies between the different statins (supplementary Figure A and supplementary Table A).191”

    From 2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias (2016) · cites this paper as [191]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Chong PH (2002) Lack of therapeutic interchange- ability of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 36, 1907-1917.
  2. Jones PH, Davidson MH, Stein EA et al. (2003) Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin vs. atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR* trial). American Journal of Cardiol- ogy, 92, 152-160.
  3. Dart A, Jerums G, Nicholson G, et al. (1997) A multicenter, double-blind, one-year study compar- ing safety and efficacy of atorvastatin vs. simvas- tatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia. The American Journal of Cardiology, 80, 39-44.
  4. E18. Kadikoylu G, Yukselen V, Yavasoglu I, Bolaman Z (2003) Hemostatic effects of atorvastatin vs. sim- vastatin. The Annals of pharmacotherapy, 37, 478-484.
  5. E22. Brown AS, Bakker-Arkema RG, Yellen L, et al. (1998) Treating patients with documented athero- sclerosis to National Cholesterol Education Program-recommended low-density-lipoprotein parative study). The European Study Group. American Journal of Cardiology, 70, 1281-1286.
  6. E55. Jones PH, Davidson MH, Stein EA, et al. (2003) Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvas- tatin vs. atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR* Trial). The American Journal of Cardiology, 92, 152-160.
  7. E60. Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. (2004) Intensive vs. moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes. The New England Journal of Medicine, 350, 1495-1504.
  8. E66. Pedersen TR, Faergeman O, Kastelein JJP, et al. (2005) High-dose atorvastatin vs. usual-dose sim- vastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized con- trolled trial. Journal of the American Medical Associa- tion, 294, 2437-2445.
  9. E75. Middleton A, Fuat A (2006) Achieving lipid goals in real life: the DISCOVERY-UK study. British Journal of Cardiology, 13, 72-76.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weng, T.-C., Yang, Y.-H. K., Lin, S.-J., & Tai, S.-H.
Affiliations
  • National Cheng Kung University (TW)
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • National Cheng Kung University Hospital (TW)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-08-14
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
139-151
ISSN
0269-4727 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1735246829
Cited by
345
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 39 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 38 · 2012: 26
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
Keywords
statins, therapeutic equivalence, LDL cholesterol lowering, hypercholesterolemia, atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, statin dose comparison, statin safety
MeSH terms
Anticholesteremic Agents, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Hypercholesterolemia, Cholesterol, LDL, Therapeutic Equivalency, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review