Evidence Hub

Comparative Muscle Tolerability of Different Types and Intensities of Statins: A Network Meta-Analysis of Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trials

Hou Q, Chen Y, Zhang Y, Pang C

Cardiovascular drugs and therapy, 2024

Abstract

PURPOSE: The benefits of statins for ischemic cardio-cerebrovascular diseases are well known. However, concerns around muscle adverse events still exist. We therefore aimed to compare the muscle safety of individual statins in adults.

METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Web of Science were searched to include double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing one statin with another or with control treatment. Pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses were undertaken with Stata 14.0 software. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was adopted for each outcome.

RESULTS: A total of 83 RCTs were included. In the pairwise meta-analysis, statins were significantly associated with only a slight increase in muscle symptoms compared with control (RR=1.05; 95% CI=1.01-1.09). In the drug-level network meta-analyses, no statistically significant difference was found between individual statins in the incidence of muscle symptoms, myalgia, myopathy, rhabdomyolysis, creatine kinase (CK) >10 times the upper limit of normal (ULN) or discontinuation due to muscle adverse events. In the dose-level network meta-analyses, there were no statistically significant dose-dependent effects on any outcomes except that moderate-intensity statins had a higher incidence of muscle symptoms than control (RR=1.13; 95% CI=1.01-1.27). Moderate simvastatin (RR=6.57; 95% CI=1.26-34.41) and moderate pravastatin (RR=5.96; 95% CI=1.00-35.44) had…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free