Cited by 130Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsPharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions

N-of-1 (Single-Patient) Trials for Statin-Related Myalgia

Joy, Tisha R., Monjed, Alaa, Zou, Guang Yong, Hegele, Robert A., McDonald, Charlotte G., Mahon, Jeffrey L.·2014·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

Background Statin-related myalgia is difficult to distinguish from other conditions causing myalgia and may often lead to statin discontinuation. Objective To compare the effect of statin rechallenge with placebo in patients with prior statin-related myalgia and to determine whether patients resumed statin therapy after evaluating the results. Design N-of-1 trial with 3 double-blind, crossover comparisons separated by 3-week washout periods. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01259791) SETTING: Tertiary care lipid clinic. Patients Patients with prior statin-related myalgia with or without mild elevation of creatine kinase levels. Intervention Rechallenge with the statin that was previously associated with myalgia within 3 weeks of open-label use versus matching placebo. Measurements Weekly visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for myalgia and specific symptoms (VAS myalgia score and symptom-specific VAS score, respectively), pain interference scores, and pain severity scores were recorded during the 3-week periods when patients were receiving placebo or statin. The primary outcome was the VAS myalgia score (range, 0 to 100 mm). Results Eight patients (mean age, 66 years [SD, 8 years]; 88% women, all with high 10-year Framingham cardiovascular risk) participated in n-of-1 trials. Seven patients completed 3 treatment pairs, and 1 completed 2 treatment pairs. For each n-of-1 trial, no statistically significant differences were seen between statin and placebo in the VAS myalgia score, symptom-…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7326/m13-1921

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Joy, T. R., Monjed, A., Zou, G. Y., Hegele, R. A., McDonald, C. G., & Mahon, J. L.
Affiliations
  • Western University (CA)
  • From Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Robarts Clinical Trials, and Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2014-03-04
Volume
160
Issue
5
Pages
301-310
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2058451295
Cited by
130
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 17
FWCI
20.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions
Keywords
statin rechallenge, N-of-1 trials, statin tolerability, statin discontinuation, creatine kinase elevation, pain interference, lipid-lowering therapy
MeSH terms
Rosuvastatin Calcium, Atorvastatin, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Double-Blind Method, Female, Fluorobenzenes, Heptanoic Acids, Humans, Hypercholesterolemia, Male, Pyrimidines, Pyrroles, Research Design, Sulfonamides, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors, Myalgia

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