Study Finds Statins Lower CVD and Mortality in People with RA, Only Modestly Increase Diabetes Risk

Sober curious


 New research presented this week at ACR Convergence, the American College of Rheumatology’s annual meeting, shows that statins are associated with reduced rates of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality in people with rheumatoid arthritis, but only modestly increase risk of type-2 diabetes, suggesting that statins’ benefits outweigh the risks in these patients (Abstract #1427). 

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is the most common type of autoimmune arthritis. It is caused when the immune system (the body’s defense system) is not working properly. RA can cause pain, swelling, and damage in the joints, including the small joints of the hands, wrists, and feet. Additionally, RA can cause inflammatory damage in other body systems such as the heart, lungs, skin, eyes, and kidney. In people with RA, chronic inflammation can increase the risk and accelerate the onset of both CVD and type-2 diabetes. Statins are widely prescribed treatments that lower blood cholesterol and triglycerides to prevent heart attacks and strokes, but they slightly increase type-2 diabetes risk. Researchers set to find out if the benefits of statins are worth the risks in people with RA who are already at risk for diabetes.

To find out, they analyzed medical records of thousands of people with RA in the United Kingdom to compare rates of CVD, mortality and type-2 diabetes in both statin users and non-users. “We know that statins have been extensively studied in the general population, but our understanding of statins’ effects in RA patients are limited and mostly based on a few studies. Given that RA patients are already at higher risk for CVD and type-2 diabetes compared to general population, it is important to know the overall benefits and risks of statins,” says Gulsen Ozen, MD, a rheumatologist at University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha and a co-author of the study. The study included patients who were 18 or older, diagnosed with RA with no other alternative diagnoses, and were prescribed one or more disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) between 1989 and 2018. Anyone with prior diabetes was excluded for type-2 diabetes risk assessment.

The study included 1,768 statin users and 3,528 non-users followed for rates of CVD and mortality, and 3,608 statin users and 7,208 non-users followed for rates of type-2 diabetes. Investigators tracked rates of CVD outcomes such as heart attack, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure and CVD-related death, as well as all-cause mortality and type-2 diabetes. Researchers found that 63 of the 1,768 statin users developed CVD compared to 340 out of the 3,528 non-users.

They also found incident type-2 diabetes in 128 of 3,608 statin users compared to 518 of the 7,208 non-users. Statin use was associated with a 32% reduction in CVD, a 54% reduction in all-cause mortality and a 33% reduction in type-2 diabetes risks. Patients with and without any prior CVD had similar reductions in both CVD (36% and 34%) and mortality (62% and 54%) risks if they took statins, the study showed. Researchers also found that the number needed to treat to prevent CVD and mortality in one year was 102 and 42, respectively, while the number needed to harm for a new diagnosis of type-2 diabetes was 127 in one year of statin treatment. 

“We know that RA patients are at higher risk for the development of CVD and death and type-2 diabetes compared to the general population. Moreover, RA patients are less frequently treated with statins than the general population, which is also concerning,” says Dr. Ozen. “We found that statins reduce both CVD and all-cause mortality, which were similar in magnitude. This may suggest that statins may have other beneficial effects in RA patients beyond lipid reduction. As rheumatologists, besides optimal disease activity control, we need to work on addressing the traditional CVD risk factors in our patients in conjunction with their primary-care providers. We believe that our findings emphasize the benefits of statins in patients with RA.”

Statins slow the progression of advanced multiple sclerosis in clinical trial

Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month
Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Month

Statins may provide doctors with an unlikely new weapon with which to slow the progression of multiple sclerosis (MS).

No treatments can currently abate the advanced stage of the disease, known as secondary progressive MS, which gradually causes patients to become more disabled.

In a two-year clinical trial involving 140 patients with secondary progressive MS, the drug simvastatin slowed brain shrinkage, which is thought to contribute to patients’ impairments. Supporting this finding, patients on simvastatin achieved better scores on movement tests and questionnaires that assess disability than patients taking a placebo.

MS is a neurological condition that affects around 2.3 million people worldwide. Most patients are initially diagnosed with relapsing-remitting MS, which causes periodic attacks. Around 65 per cent of people with relapsing remitting MS develop secondary progressive MS within 15 years of being diagnosed. The secondary progressive phase is where MS has the most personal and societal costs.

The authors of the new study, which was led by Imperial College London, said the findings were very encouraging, but would need to be replicated in a larger trial. The work is published today in the Lancet.

“At the moment, we don’t have anything that can stop patients from becoming more disabled once MS reaches the progressive phase,” said Dr Richard Nicholas, co-author of the study from the Department of Medicine at Imperial. “Discovering that statins can help slow that deterioration is quite a surprise. This is a promising finding, particularly as statins are already cheap and widely used.

“We need to do a bigger study with more patients, possibly starting in the earlier phase of the disease, to fully establish how effective it is,” he added.

Dr Nicholas ran the trial with Dr Jeremy Chataway, then in the Department of Medicine at Imperial and now at University College London.

Statins are taken by millions of people to lower cholesterol and prevent heart disease, but it’s unclear why they would have a beneficial effect on MS.

Some small studies have found a small benefit from statins in relapsing remitting MS, which is more treatable.

Secondary progressive MS has proven more challenging to alleviate. In 2013, cannabis became the latest drug to prove unsuccessful at slowing the progression of MS in a clinical trial.

This clinical trial is the culmination of long-standing research led by Professor John Greenwood at the UCL Institute of Ophthalmology showing the potential therapeutic benefits of using statins to treat autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis and uveitis.

Professor Greenwood said, “After nearly two decades of research, it is immensely gratifying to see this work progress into the clinic to deliver benefits to patients.”

Statins may slow progression of MS




Statins may slow progression of MS

Statins may slow progression of MS




“Multiple sclerosis patients may benefit from statins,” The Guardian reports.

A UK study, involving 140 participants, has found that statins, which lower cholesterol, may slow brain shrinkage in people living with multiple sclerosis (MS).

MS is a progressive condition affecting nerves in the brain and spinal cord, causing problems with balance, vision and muscle movement.

The study looked at whether simvastatin – a type of statin – could decrease shrinking of the brain, which occurs in the later stages of MS (although not all patients will reach this stage).

Using brain scans, researchers found that people with MS who took the drug had 43% less brain shrinkage a year than those who were given a dummy treatment (placebo).

A small but statistically significant improvement in one disability scale and one symptom scale was also found. However, it is unclear if these improvements would translate into a meaningful improvement in a patient’s quality of life.




The results of this small, early stage trial are promising and warrant further research, not least because simvastatin is a lot cheaper than most current MS medication.

A larger trial (known as a phase III trial) is now needed to find out if these results would translate into any benefits for a larger number of patients.

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from University College London, Imperial College London, Brighton and Sussex Medical School and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

It was funded by the Multiple Sclerosis Trials Collaboration, University College London Biomedical Research Centres funding scheme, a number of registered charities and a personal contribution.

The study was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet on an open access basis, meaning it is free to read online.

Most of the UK’s media reported the study accurately; however, The Independent’s headline – “Surprise discovery shows multiple sclerosis sufferers’ lives are significantly improved by taking statins” – is misleading and inaccurate. The study was looking primarily at a patients’ brain size, not quality of life.

The effects of simvastatin on a patient’s quality of life are likely to remain uncertain until a phase III trial is carried out.

What kind of research was this?

This was an early stage (phase II) placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial (RCT), examining whether a cholesterol-lowering drug called simvastatin could help patients in the later stages of MS.

MS is a progressive disease, with many patients seeing a steady worsening of symptoms and disability.

An RCT is the best kind of study to determine the effectiveness of healthcare treatments. A phase II trial is usually designed to look at a treatment’s safety, how well it is tolerated and if it is worth testing in a larger (phase III) trial.

In its early stages, the disease is characterised by intermittent symptoms (called relapse-remitting MS), and some treatments have been developed that can reduce symptoms at this stage.

However, over 10-15 years, more than half of MS patients progress to a secondary stage (called secondary progressive MS), in which symptoms gradually worsen and there are fewer or no periods of remission.

MS occurs when a substance called myelin, which insulates the nerve fibres carrying messages to and from the brain, becomes damaged.

It is an autoimmune condition, which means the immune system mistakes the myelin for a foreign substance and attacks it.

The myelin becomes inflamed in small patches (called plaques or lesions), which can be seen on an MRI scan.

The researchers point out that in the secondary stages of MS, there is increasing brain atrophy (shrinkage). There are currently no treatments for the later stages of this disease.

They also say that statins have anti-inflammatory and other protective effects on the nervous system. An early trial of simvastatin in people with early stage MS showed a reduction in brain lesions, although other trials had conflicting results.

The purpose of this study was to see if simvastatin had a positive effect in a larger sample group with progressive MS.

What did the research involve?

The researchers set out to look at the potential effects of simvastatin in the secondary progressive stage of MS.

They randomly assigned 140 adults aged 18-65 with this stage of the disease to receive either a daily dose (80mg) of simvastatin or a placebo drug for two years.

All the patients, their doctors and the researchers assessing the trial outcomes were “masked” to treatment allocation.

This means they did not know whether patients were getting simvastatin or the placebo drug.

This type of double-blind testing is regarded as the “gold standard” of assessing the effectiveness of a drug or intervention.

The researchers were primarily interested in the effect of simvastatin on brain atrophy (or wastage). To measure this they took MRI scans of the patients’ brains at the start of the study and then again at 12 and 25 months. The last scan was undertaken one month after the last medication was taken. They based their calculations on an assumption that in this stage of the disease, the brain atrophies (shrinks) by about 0.6% a year.

They also used a number of disability scales at the start of treatment, and at 24 months, to look at whether simvastatin had any effect on patients’ disability. It also looked at the frequency of relapse in symptoms (a common problem with MS) compared to the placebo.

They also looked at levels of various markers in the blood linked to immune system function and inflammation.

The results were adjusted for factors such as sex and gender, and serious adverse effects were recorded.

What were the basic results?

Researchers found that the average rate of brain atrophy was 43% lower in patients in the simvastatin group (0.288% per year than in those in the placebo group – equivalent to 0.584% per year).

Simvastatin was well tolerated, with no differences between the placebo and simvastatin groups in the number of participants who had serious adverse events (20% in the placebo group and 13% in the simvastatin group).

A small but significant positive effect was seen on the patient-reported MS impact scale for people taking simvastatin. Overall symptoms were 4.47 points less, on a scale of 29 to 116.

Simvastatin also showed a similarly small but significant positive effect in one disability scale, but with no difference in another scale.

There was no effect seen on blood markers, rate of new and enlarging lesions, or the frequency of relapse.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers say that a daily 80mg simvastatin might be a treatment option for secondary progressive MS, although warrants further investigation. How simvastatin might help protect against brain atrophy is still unclear, but they believe it could be due to the effect on vascular function or cell protection.

Conclusion

This was an early stage, phase II trial, which found that simvastatin reduced the rate of brain shrinkage in patients in the later stages of MS.

The results are promising and warrant a larger phase III trial, examining whether the drug could slow the disease in patients at this stage of MS.

It should be noted that although simvastatin had some effect on outcomes in one disability scale and one symptom scale, the trial was primarily aimed at measuring the effect on brain shrinkage, rather than patients’ symptoms.

To conclude, it is unclear what effect simvastatin, if any, would have on long-term quality of life for MS patients.

A final interesting point is how simvastatin is actually reducing brain shrinkage. If we discovered the mechanisms involved, this could lead to new treatment strategies.

Analysis by Bazian
Edited by NHS Website

Statins ‘may not help over-75s without diabetes

Cooling and multiple sclerosis

Cooling and multiple sclerosis

“Millions given statins ‘just in case’ are wasting their time and don’t receive any benefit,” reports the Mail Online.

Statins are a class of medicine that helps lower the body’s cholesterol level. They’re recommended for people thought to be at increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), such as heart attack or stroke.

Older adults are among those at higher risk of CVD, which is why they may be prescribed statins to lower their risk, even if they’re otherwise healthy.

Researchers used information from a Spanish database to look at what happened to 46,864 people aged 75 and over, 7,502 of whom were prescribed statins for the first time.

They found that those with diabetes saw a reduction in their risk of heart attack, stroke or death, but those without diabetes seemed to gain no benefit.

The way the study was carried out means it’s hard to draw definitive conclusions.

It’s possible that people who weren’t given statins were healthier and had a lower cardiovascular risk than those who received the drugs, masking the benefits of the drug.

In other words, the people who took statins may have had an increased risk of heart attacks or strokes had they not taken them.

Current UK recommendations say that people with a 10% or higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease in the next 10 years should be offered statins. This would include most people over 75.

Treatment decisions have to be made on an individual patient basis, balancing risks and benefits. It’s not advised to stop taking prescribed medicines without talking to your doctor first.

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from the Institut Universitari d’Investigacio en Atencio Primaria Jordi Gol, the Catalan Institut of Health, the Municipal Institute for Medical Research and the University of Salamanca, all in Spain.

It was funded by grants from the Spanish and Catalan governments, as well as from the EU.

The study was published in the peer-reviewed British Medical Journal (BMJ) on an open-access basis, so it can be read online for free.

It was widely covered by the UK media. Despite some sweeping headlines, most of the stories included balancing comments from UK clinicians about the drawbacks of the research methodology and the need to treat the results with caution.

For example, The Independent included a reaction from Tim Chico, professor of cardiovascular medicine at the University of Sheffield, who said: “Due to its design, this study cannot tell us whether or not statins reduce death or cardiovascular disease in older people.”

What kind of research was this?

This was a retrospective cohort study.

This type of observational study is useful for comparing what happens to groups of people in different situations (in this case, people over 75 who have or haven’t been prescribed statins), but it can’t show cause and effect.

So in this case, it can’t show whether living longer or having strokes or heart attacks are a direct effect of taking or not taking statins.

What did the research involve?

Researchers used a database of patients registered with GPs in the Catalonia region of Spain.

They selected records from patients over 75 without cardiovascular disease who weren’t taking statins and were also free of major diseases such as cancer and dementia.

They looked at what happened to those prescribed statins for the first time, with an average follow-up time of 7.7 years.

They also looked at what happened to those not prescribed statins during a similar time period.

The researchers looked separately at age groups 75 to 84 and 85 plus, and at people with and without type 2 diabetes.

They calculated people’s chances of having died or developed cardiovascular disease during the follow-up period, and compared the chances for people who did or didn’t take statins.

They adjusted the figures to take account of a number of potential confounding factors, including:

age

sex

blood pressure

body mass index

other cardiovascular risk factors, such as diabetes, smoking, high cholesterol and heavy alcohol use

other illnesses, such as arthritis, asthma and atrial fibrillation

other drugs, such as water tablets (diuretics), anti-inflammatories and aspirin

results of blood tests for glucose, cholesterol and other blood fats, and kidney function

“deprivation” (which we assume means low socioeconomic status)

number of visits to the doctor

What were the basic results?

People with diabetes

Researchers found people aged 75 to 84 with diabetes had a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease or death if they took statins compared with non-users:

24% reduced risk of cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65 to 0.89) with statins

16% reduced risk of death (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.94) with statins

People without diabetes

People aged 75 to 84 without diabetes taking statins had the same risk of cardiovascular disease or death as those not taking statins (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.04 for cardiovascular disease; HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.05 for death).

People aged 85 or over

For all people aged 85 or over there was no apparent benefit of taking statins, whether they had diabetes or not.

The research showed no increase in risk of muscle pain, liver problems or diagnosis with type 2 diabetes among people taking statins.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers said: “Our results support the need to individualise the decision-making process about statin treatment in old and very old populations.”

They say that their results, being based on observational data, “may not provide enough grounds for direct clinical recommendations”, but they “may help to make decisions in clinical practice” while awaiting the results of randomised controlled trials of statins for older people.

Conclusion

Statins have prolonged the lives of many people after a first heart attack or stroke, and prevented many repeat heart attacks and strokes for these people.

The benefits of taking statins if you haven’t had a heart attack or stroke and don’t have cardiovascular risk factors are more controversial.

There’s good evidence that statins can reduce the risk of developing cardiovascular disease and having a first heart attack or stroke, although the evidence is less strong for people aged 75 and older.

UK guidance currently recommends that people are assessed for cardiovascular risk factors up to the age of 84.

People who are assessed to have a 10% or greater risk of cardiovascular disease in the next 10 years would then usually be offered a statin.

This seems to differ from the situation in Europe and the US, where the recommendation is to offer statins to people aged up to 65 and 75, respectively.

But this study has limitations and doesn’t necessarily mean that UK recommendations to prescribe statins for older adults are incorrect.

The main limitation is that the study relies on observational evidence, rather than being a randomised controlled trial.

This means we can’t be sure why people were given statins and so can’t exclude the possibility that factors other than statins affected the results.

If people given statins were less healthy and had been assessed to have a higher cardiovascular risk than people not given the drugs, this could have masked the beneficial effects of treatment.

The research found statins reduced risk for people aged 75 to 84 who had diabetes. This would be in line with current UK recommendations to prescribe statins to people with cardiovascular risk.

People given statins who didn’t have diabetes may on balance have been assessed to have other factors that put them at higher risk.

Also, although the overall size of the study is large, some of the sub-groups are quite small.

For example, there were only 1,239 people aged over 85 with diabetes in the study, and only 201 of them started taking statins during the study. That’s quite a small number to assess the effect of statins in this group.

We need more good-quality evidence for the effect of statins in old and very old people, and at least one trial is under way. But the results of this trial aren’t expected to be available until 2022.

In practice, doctors will consider the benefits and potential drawbacks of taking statins on an individual basis. The risks from statins are quite small, and this study found no reason to stop taking them.

But if you’re unsure whether you want to take them or continue taking them, the best answer is to talk to your GP about your individual risk of cardiovascular disease.

You can then make a decision together, based on your circumstances and preferences.

Analysis by Bazian
Edited by NHS Website

Lowering Cholesterol: How do we go about lowering Cholesterol – diet or statins?

Animal Fats

Animal Fats

High cholesterol is one of those medical issues that has been associated with the massive leaps in the standard of living for many people in the Twentieth century.  With the changes in diet and the decline in manual labour more and more people suffer from high cholesterol.  According to the US government around 17% of Americans have higher cholesterol than is good for them.

While high cholesterol has no direct symptoms it does increase the risks of heart disease and strokes.

So what, in fact, is cholesterol?  Well it is a fat like substance that is vital to health.  Both too much and too little can be injurious to health. It has a number of different functions.  For example it helps build the membranes around your body cells.  It is also important as a way of helping your body absorb various vitamins.  For example vitamin D – for more information on the importance of vitamin D please have a look at this blog https://patienttalk.org/?p=300.

So how do we lower cholesterol?

If your doctor feels that you have a high cholesterol count, typically, they will recommend a change in diet and increasing the amount of exercise you do.

The sort of changes in diet normally recommended will be to reduce your consumption of foods which are high in saturated fat and cholesterol itself.  These can include fatty cuts of meat and many processed foods as well as dairy products such as cheese and cream so you might want to seek out soya based alternatives.  Doctors may also suggest you increase the amount of oily fish such as salmon and mackerel you consume.

Obviously if you do smoke now is the time to think about quitting.  This blog might use useful if you are considering nicotine replacement therapy – https://patienttalk.org/?p=495.

However in some cases your doctor may feel that a medication may be appropriate.  Typically these come in a number of forms:-

a)      Statins.  By far the most common type of medication as they block the production of cholesterol itself.

b)      Bile Acid Resins.  These stop bile (which is mainly cholesterol) from being absorbed into the body.


Other products such as fibrates and nicotinic acid can be used.

In very rare cases patient might go through a complex blood cleansing process.

One of the aims of this blog is to provide a forum for our readers to share their experiences of lowering cholesterol.  Please use the comments box below to share any ideas and experiences with your fellow readers.  Anything will be of interest but you may wish to think in terms of the following questions:-

a)      How did you find out that you had high cholesterol?  What was the testing process?

b)      What changes in lifestyle (e.g. diet or exercise) did you make to help lower your cholesterol?

c)       Have you used a cholesterol lowering medication?  How effective was it?

d)      What one piece of advice would you give to somebody who has just discovered that they have high cholesterol?

Thanks very much for all your help.  As we said please do you the comments box below to add you thoughts, opinions or any links you think may be of use to other readers of the blog.