Cookie policy: This site uses cookies (small files stored on your computer) to simplify and improve your experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information please take a look at our terms and conditions. Some parts of the site may not work properly if you choose not to accept cookies.


Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login


Lack of evidence to support statin use in non-cardiovascular conditions

Although researchers found some evidence that statins may improve cancer survival in people taking them pre-diagnosis, there was a lack of convincing evidence overall, leading them to conclude that current recommendations should remain unchanged. 

There is a lack of ‘convincing’ evidence that statins improve outcomes in non-cardiovascular conditions, a review has shown.

The study looked at 112 meta-analyses of observational studies and 144 meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), exploring a total of 278 non-cardiovascular disease (non-CVD) outcomes.

The evidence for observational studies was grouped into four classes: ‘convincing’ (class I), ‘highly suggestive’ (class II), ‘suggestive’ (class III) and ‘weak’ (class IV).

The researchers found two ‘highly suggestive’ associations, including improved cancer survival in people who were already taking the drugs before diagnosis and reduced exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

But the remaining associations identified were classified as either ‘suggestive’ (n=21) or ‘weak’ (n=42) and there was no ‘convincing’ evidence of an association between statins and non-CVD outcomes. 

For the RCTs, only one outcome (reduced all-cause mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease) was classified as having high credibility.

Statins are licensed for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease, but their growing use has led to interest in their potential effects on non-cardiovascular outcomes, the researchers explained.

They said that overall there was a lack of evidence that statins had a major role in the outcomes considered, such as Alzheimer’s disease, infection risk and prostate cancer recurrence.

“The absence of convincing evidence of an association between statins and non-CVD outcomes supports leaving the current recommendations unchanged,” the team wrote in Annals of Internal Medicine (online, 9 October 2018)[1].

Citation: Clinical Pharmacist DOI: 10.1211/CP.2018.20205698

Have your say

For commenting, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will have the ability to comment.

Recommended from Pharmaceutical Press

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Jobs you might like

Newsletter Sign-up

Want to keep up with the latest news, comment and CPD articles in pharmacy and science? Subscribe to our free alerts.