IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0338575.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Safety outcomes of statin vs non-statin lipid-lowering interventions in patients with prior statin-associated muscle symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Philipp Stefan Aebi
  • Fanny Villoz
  • Jonas Bührer
  • Christina Lyko
  • Nazanin Abolhassani
  • Cinzia Del Giovane
  • Baris Gencer
  • Nicolas Rodondi
  • Manuel R Blum

Abstract

Background: Statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS) are an obstacle in the prevention of cardiovascular events. A systematic assessment of the evidence of interventions in the setting of SAMS is lacking. Objective: To assess the evidence of strategies of statin-based vs non-statin based therapies in patients with a history of SAMS. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov and Proquest databases were searched from inception up to February 2024.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies involving patients with history of prior SAMS, comparing statin-based therapy to a comparator. We followed the PRISMA guideline with multiple authors involved at each stage. A random-effect model was used in the meta-analysis. We defined the primary outcome as incidence of muscle symptoms. The secondary outcomes were proportion of statin discontinuation of statin-based therapy within patients with history of SAMS. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020202619). Results: In 23 studies (13 RCTs, 2 prospective and 8 retrospective studies) there were in total 1868 participants in RCTs and 47’628 participants in non-RCTs (follow-up 12 weeks – 31 months). Our confidence in the body of evidence using GRADE was moderate for the primary outcome and low-moderate for the secondary outcome. In RCTs among patients with history of SAMS, there was high heterogeneity in the statin regimens and controls (placebo/non-daily dosing/ezetimibe/PCSK9 inhibitors). In RCTs, the meta-analysis showed no difference between statin-based and control groups in the incidence of muscle symptoms (OR 1.19, 95%CI 0.86–1.64, I2: 46.3%)). Therapy discontinuation due to muscle symptoms in RCTs was higher in the statin-based than the comparator groups (OR 1.48, 95%CI 1.03–2.12, I2 = 17.6%). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that patients with a history of SAMS can be re-challenged with statins. More high-quality evidence is needed to strengthen guidelines regarding the management of SAMS.

Suggested Citation

  • Philipp Stefan Aebi & Fanny Villoz & Jonas Bührer & Christina Lyko & Nazanin Abolhassani & Cinzia Del Giovane & Baris Gencer & Nicolas Rodondi & Manuel R Blum, 2025. "Safety outcomes of statin vs non-statin lipid-lowering interventions in patients with prior statin-associated muscle symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(12), pages 1-15, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0338575
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0338575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0338575
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0338575&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0338575?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0338575. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.