A 2016 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) was associated with reduced mortality and cardiovascular outcomes.
To update the 2016 review on statins for primary prevention of CVD to inform the USPSTF
Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to November 2021); surveillance through May 20, 2022.
Randomized clinical trials on statins vs placebo or no statin and statin intensity in adults without prior cardiovascular events; large cohort studies on harms.
Data Extraction and Synthesis
One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality.
Main Outcomes and Measures
All-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, composite cardiovascular outcomes, and adverse events.
Twenty-six studies were included: 22 trials (N = 90 624) with 6 months to 6 years of follow-up compared statins vs placebo or no statin, 1 trial (n = 5144) compared statin intensities, and 3 observational studies (n = 417 523) reported harms. Statins were significantly associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.87 to 0.98]; absolute risk difference [ARD], −0.35% [95% CI, −0.57% to −0.14%]), stroke (RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.90]; ARD, −0.39% [95% CI, −0.54% to −0.25%]), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.75]; ARD, −0.85% [95% CI, −1.22% to −0.47%]), and composite cardiovascular outcomes (RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81]; ARD, −1.28% [95% CI, −1.61% to −0.95%]); the association with cardiovascular mortality was not statistically significant (RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.02]; ARD, −0.13%). Relative benefits were consistent in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics, although data for persons older than 75 years were sparse. Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased risk of serious adverse events (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.01]), myalgias (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.11]), or elevated alanine aminotransferase level (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.13]). Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased diabetes risk overall (RR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.19]), although 1 trial found high-intensity statin therapy was significantly associated with increased risk (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.49]). Otherwise, there were no clear differences in outcomes based on statin intensity.
Conclusions and Relevance
In adults at increased CVD risk but without prior CVD events, statin therapy for primary prevention of CVD was associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality and CVD events. Benefits of statin therapy appear to be present across diverse demographic and clinical populations, with consistent relative benefits in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics.
Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates
JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC
CME Disclosure Statement: Unless noted, all individuals in control of content reported no relevant financial relationships. If applicable, all relevant financial relationships have been mitigated.
Corresponding Author: Roger Chou, MD, Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Mail Code BICC, Portland, OR 97239 (email@example.com).
Accepted for Publication: June 29, 2022.
Author Contributions: Dr. Chou had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Concept and design: Chou, Dana, Ferencik.
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Chou, Cantor, Dana, Wagner, Ahmed, Fu, Ferencik.
Drafting of the manuscript: Chou, Dana, Wagner, Ahmed, Fu, Ferencik.
Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Chou, Cantor, Wagner, Ferencik.
Statistical analysis: Chou, Dana, Wagner, Fu.
Obtained funding: Chou, Cantor.
Administrative, technical, or material support: Cantor, Dana, Wagner.
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Ferencik reported receiving grants from the American Heart Association and serving as a consultant for Biograph Inc. No other disclosures were reported.
Funding/Support: This research was funded under contract HHSA290201500007i; Group A, Task Order 75Q80119F32009, from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), US Department of Health and Human Services, under a contract to support the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).
Role of the Funder/Sponsor: Investigators worked with USPSTF members and AHRQ staff to develop the scope, analytic framework, and key questions for this review. AHRQ had no role in study selection, quality assessment, or synthesis. AHRQ staff provided project oversight, reviewed the report to ensure that the analysis met methodological standards, and distributed the draft for peer review. Otherwise, AHRQ had no role in the conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript findings. The opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of AHRQ or the US Department of Health and Human Services.
Additional Contributions: We thank the following individuals for their contributions to this project: Jennifer Lin, MD, MCR, Kaiser Permanente Evidence-based Practice Center, Portland, Oregon; Christina Bougatsos, MPH, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland; Yun Yu, MS, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland; Howard Tracer, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; as well as the USPSTF. We also acknowledge past and current USPSTF members who contributed to topic deliberations. The USPSTF members, external reviewers, and federal partner reviewers did not receive financial compensation for their contributions.
Additional Information: A draft version of this evidence report underwent external peer review from 3 content experts (Jacquelyn Kulinski, MD, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee; Bruce Warden, PharmD, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland; Eugene Yang, MD, MS, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle); and 1 federal partner from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Comments were presented to the USPSTF during its deliberation of the evidence and were considered in preparing the final evidence review.
Editorial Disclaimer: This evidence report is presented as a document in support of the accompanying USPSTF recommendation statement. It did not undergo additional peer review after submission to JAMA.
You currently have no searches saved.
You currently have no courses saved.