Cited by 33Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug ReactionsLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthPain Management and Placebo Effect

Examining the nocebo effect of statins through statin adverse events reported in the food and drug administration adverse event reporting system

Open access
Moon, Jungyeon, Cohen Sedgh, Robert, Jackevicius, Cynthia A.·2021·Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate whether the high frequency of reported statin adverse effects (AEs) may be associated with the nocebo effect. We compared nocebo-related subjective AEs with objective AEs and investigated factors potentially associated with the nocebo effect. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System between January 2010 and December 2019 for statins, including, atorvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin. Subjective AEs included fatigue, subjective muscular, and nervous system AEs. Objective AEs were defined as hepatic and objective muscular AEs. We compared the number of subjective and objective AEs using the Mann-Whitney U test and examined trends in the frequency of subjective versus objective reports over time using linear regression with interaction terms. We evaluated the association between AEs and gender and country using linear regression. Quantitative detection of signals was estimated using proportional reporting ratio and reporting odds ratio for simvastatin. Results: Of 2 994 487 overall AE reports, more subjective than objective AEs were reported per quarter (mean±SD: 4777±1375.45 versus 999±276.95; P <0.0001), and over time during the study period ( P <0.001). Women reported more subjective AEs than men per quarter (fatigue: 86.98 more per quarter, P =0.035; subjective muscular AE: 417.95, P <0.0001; nervous system AE: 273.60, P <0.0001), but fewer objective muscular AEs (−125.23 per quarter, P <0.0001). More subjective AEs and fewer objective AEs were reported per quarter in the United States relative to other countries. Simvastatin-associated reports showed signals for higher objective muscular AEs relative to all other statins (reporting odds ratio, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.49–1.58]). Conclusions: This study found that significantly more subjective than objective AEs are reported for statins. Subjective statin AEs, potentially related to the nocebo effect are reported more often by women than by men, and in the United States than in other countries.

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 · 10.1161/circoutcomes.120.007480

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • Subjective adverse events such as fatigue, myalgias, and nervous system symptoms are more frequent than objective adverse events due to the nocebo effect, with women experiencing adverse events more frequently than men.

    “Subjective adverse events (such as fatigue, myalgias, and nervous system symptoms) are more frequent than objective adverse events due to the nocebo effect, with women experiencing adverse events more frequently than men.256”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moon, J., Cohen Sedgh, R., & Jackevicius, C. A.
Affiliations
  • Western University of Health Sciences (US)
  • Western University of Health Sciences, Pomona, CA (J.M., R.C., C.A.J.).
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
Published
2021-01
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
e007480-e007480
ISSN
  • 1941-7705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-7713
OpenAlex
W3100962608
Cited by
33
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5
FWCI
2.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Circulation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
Keywords
nocebo effect, statins, adverse drug reactions, sex differences, simvastatin, drug safety signals, fatigue, FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, proportional reporting ratio, reporting odds ratio, atorvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin
MeSH terms
Atorvastatin, Female, Humans, Male, Retrospective Studies, United States, United States Food and Drug Administration, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors, Nocebo Effect

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