4.8 Article

Is statin-modified reduction in lipids the most important preventive therapy for cardiovascular disease? A pro/con debate

Journal

BMC MEDICINE
Volume 14, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-016-0550-5

Keywords

Statins; Prevention; Cardiovascular disease; Debate; Evidence

Funding

  1. National Health Service (NHS)
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (SPCR)
  3. NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (OxBRC)
  4. NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research (CLAHRC) Oxford
  5. Harris Manchester College, Oxford, UK
  6. Abbott
  7. Abbott Vascular
  8. Amgen
  9. Daiichi Sankyo
  10. MSD
  11. Resverlogix Corporation
  12. Sanofi-Regeneron
  13. Valeant
  14. AstraZeneca
  15. Libytec
  16. Medical Research Council [MC_PC_11004, G0900847] Funding Source: researchfish
  17. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0611-10273] Funding Source: researchfish
  18. MRC [G0900847, MC_PC_11004] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The most prescribed medications in the world are statins, lipid modifiers that have been available for over 25 years and amongst the most investigated of all drug classes. With over a million patient years of trial data and publications in the most prestigious medical journals, it is remarkable that quite so much debate remains as to their place in healthcare. They have had a bittersweet passage, with vocal concerns over their possible risks, from suicide to cancer, and allegations that they do not work in women or the elderly, to statements that the whole published dataset, on over 200,000 patients consenting to enter trials, was fatally compromised by being industry-funded by and large. On the other side, there have been billions of dollars spent on generating their evidence base followed by promotion which has returned that investment many times over in profits, and a powerful scientific lobby that argue they are wonder drugs and that continued nihilism on their value risks patient lives. So who is right?

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available