Rosuvastatin dose-dependently improves flow-mediated dilation, but reduces adiponectin levels and insulin sensitivity in hypercholesterolemic patients

Comparative effects of pravastatin and rosuvastatin on carbohydrate metabolism in an experimental diabetic rat model

Statin treatment may increase the risk of diabetes; there is insufficient data on how statins affect glucose regulation and glycemic control and the effects of statins on liver enzymes related to carbohydrate metabolism have not been fully studied. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effects of the statin derivatives, pravastatin, and rosuvastatin, on carbohydrate metabolism in an experimental diabetic rat model. Female Wistar albino rats were used and diabetes was induced by intraperitoneal injection of streptozotocin. Thereafter, 10 and 20 mg kg-1 day-1 doses of both pravastatin and rosuvastatin were administered by oral gavage to the diabetic rats for 8 weeks. At the end of the experiment, body masses, the levels of fasting blood glucose, serum insulin, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), liver glycogen, and liver enzymes related to carbohydrate metabolism were measured. Both doses of pravastatin significantly in creased the body mass in diabetic rats, however, rosuvastatin, especially at the dose of 20 mg kg-1 day-1 reduced the body mass signi ficantly. Pravastatin, especially at a dose of 20 mg kg-1 day-1, caused significant increases in liver glycogen synthase and glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase levels but significant decreases in the levels of glycogen phosphorylase, lactate dehydrogenase, and glucose-6-phosphatase. Hence, pravastatin partially ameliorated the adverse changes in liver enzymes caused by diabetes and, especially at the dose of 20 mg kg-1 day-1, reduced the fasting blood glucose level and increased the liver glycogen content. However, rosuvastatin, especially at the dose of 20 mg kg-1 day-1, significantly reduced the liver glycogen synthase and pyruvate kinase levels, but increased the glycogen phosphorylase level in diabetic rats. Rosuvastatin, 20 mg kg-1 day-1 dose, caused significant decreases in the body mass and the liver glycogen content of diabetic rats. It can be concluded that pravastatin, especially at the dose of 20 mg kg-1 day-1 is more effective in ameliorating the negative effects of diabetes by modulating carbohydrate metabolism.

Assessing the Link Between Statins and Insulin Intolerance: A Systematic Review

There has been mixed and inconclusive evidence regarding the relationship between statin usage and insulin intolerance. This systematic review aims to comprehensively explore the link between the use of statins and insulin intolerance. We systematically searched MEDLINE, PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), and Google Scholar databases for online English articles with full text. We excluded conference proceedings, editorials, commentaries, preclinical studies, abstracts, and preprints. The search across databases initially identified 667 articles. After eliminating duplicates and analyzing the remaining articles based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 11 articles were selected. The included studies had a total of 46,728,889 participants. The findings suggest that the use of statins is associated with a decrease in insulin sensitivity and insulin resistance. This systematic review provides evidence that the use of statins may have an adverse effect on insulin sensitivity and increase insulin resistance. These findings may have important clinical implications for individuals on statin therapy, especially those at risk of developing diabetes.

Effects of statin therapy on glycemic control and insulin resistance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To update the evidence about the diabetogenic effect of statins.

METHODS

We searched for randomized-controlled trials reporting the effects of statin therapy on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and/or homeostatic model insulin resistance (i.e., HOMA-IR) as indexes of diabetes. Studies were classified between the ones testing normal vs individuals with already altered glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 6.5%; and HOMA-IR ≥ 2.15). Furthermore, studies were separated by statin type and dosage prescribed. Data are presented as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 67 studies were included in the analysis (>25,000 individuals). In individuals with altered glycemic control, statins increased HbA1c levels (MD 0.21%, 95% CI 0.16-to-0.25) and HOMA-IR index (MD 0.31, 95% CI 0.24-to-0.38). In individuals with normal glycemic control, statin increased HbA1c (MD 1.33%, 95% CI 1.31-to-1.35) and HOMA-IR (MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.41-to-0.58) in comparison to the placebo groups. The dose or type of statins did not modulate the diabetogenic effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Statins, slightly but significantly raise indexes of diabetes in individuals with adequate or altered glycemic control. The diabetogenic effect does not seem to be influenced by the type or dosage of statin prescribed.

Do Statins Counteract the Effect of Antidiabetic Drugs? Results of the SCEAD Study

PURPOSE

Diabetes and dyslipidemia are leading causes of mortality and morbidity. According to international guidelines, statins are the cornerstone of treatment in patients with diabetes and/or dyslipidemia. However, statins and antidiabetic agents have opposite pharmacological effects, because statins, particularly atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, impair glucose homeostasis, increasing the risk of new-onset diabetes, whereas antidiabetic drugs improve glycemic homeostasis. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and pitavastatin on glucose homeostasis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and dyslipidemia during stable treatment with hypoglycemic drugs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted as a pilot, prospective, randomized, open label, parallel group with blinded-endpoints (PROBE) study. Of 180 recruited patients with T2DM and dyslipidemia, 131 were randomized to atorvastatin (n=44), rosuvastatin (n=45), and pitavastatin (n=42) and treated for 6 months.

RESULTS

Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) marginally decreased in patients assigned to atorvastatin (-3.5 mg/dL, p=0.42) and rosuvastatin (-6.5 mg/dL, p=0.17), while it decreased much more in patients treated with pitavastatin (-19.0 mg/dL, p<0.001). Mean glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c ) values remained unchanged during treatment with atorvastatin (-0.10%, p=0.53) and rosuvastatin (0.20%, p=0.40), but were significantly reduced with pitavastatin (-0.75%, p=0.01). Atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and pitavastatin significantly lowered (p<0.001) plasma levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, and triglycerides, while high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) levels increased significantly (p=0.04) only in the pitavastatin group.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study suggest that pitavastatin affects FPG and HbA1c less than atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in patients with T2DM and concomitant dyslipidemia. Lipid-lowering efficacies were not significantly different among the three statins, with the exception of HDL-C, which increased significantly with pitavastatin. Although the pharmacological mechanism of pitavastatin on glucose homeostasis in patients with T2DM during stable antidiabetic therapy is not known, it can be assumed that pitavastatin has less drug interaction with hypoglycemic agents or that it increases plasma levels of adiponectin.

The effect of various types and doses of statins on C-reactive protein levels in patients with dyslipidemia or coronary heart disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective

The objective of this study was to measure the efficacy of various types and dosages of statins on C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in patients with dyslipidemia or coronary heart disease.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials were searched from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, OpenGray, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for data extraction and synthesis. The pairwise meta-analysis compared statins and controls using a random-effects model, and a network meta-analysis compared the types and dosages of statins using the Bayesian random-effects model. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42021242067.

Results

The study included 37 randomized controlled trials with 17,410 participants and 20 interventions. According to the pairwise meta-analysis, statins significantly decreased CRP levels compared to controls (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] [−1.31, −0.64], P < 0.0001). In the network meta-analysis, simvastatin 40 mg/day appeared to be the best strategy for lowering CRP (Rank P = 0.18, WMD = −4.07, 95% CI = [−6.52, −1.77]). The same was true for the high-sensitivity CRP, non-acute coronary syndrome (ACS), <12 months duration, and clear measurement subgroups. In the CRP subgroup (rank P = 0.79, WMD = −1.23, 95% CI = [−2.48, −0.08]) and ≥12-month duration subgroup (Rank P = 0.40, WMD = −2.13, 95% CI = [−4.24, −0.13]), atorvastatin 80 mg/day was most likely to be the best. There were no significant differences in the dyslipidemia and ACS subgroups (P > 0.05). Node-splitting analysis showed no significant inconsistency (P > 0.05), except for the coronary heart disease subgroup.

Conclusion

Statins reduced serum CRP levels in patients with dyslipidemia or coronary heart disease. Simvastatin 40 mg/day might be the most effective therapy, and atorvastatin 80 mg/day showed the best long-term effect. This study provides a reference for choosing statin therapy based on LDL-C and CRP levels.

Comparative effectiveness of statins on non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol in people with diabetes and at risk of cardiovascular disease: systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of different statin treatments by intensity on levels of non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in people with diabetes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase from inception to 1 December 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

Randomised controlled trials comparing different types and intensities of statins, including placebo, in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus were included. The primary outcome was changes in levels of non-HDL-C, calculated from measures of total cholesterol and HDL-C. Secondary outcomes were changes in levels of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and total cholesterol, three point major cardiovascular events (non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and death related to cardiovascular disease), and discontinuations because of adverse events. A bayesian network meta-analysis of statin intensity (low, moderate, or high) with random effects evaluated the treatment effect on non-HDL-C by mean differences and 95% credible intervals. Subgroup analysis of patients at greater risk of major cardiovascular events was compared with patients at low or moderate risk. The confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) framework was applied to determine the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

In 42 randomised controlled trials involving 20 193 adults, 11 698 were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, the greatest reductions in levels of non-HDL-C were seen with rosuvastatin at high (-2.31 mmol/L, 95% credible interval -3.39 to -1.21) and moderate (-2.27, -3.00 to -1.49) intensities, and simvastatin (-2.26, -2.99 to -1.51) and atorvastatin (-2.20, -2.69 to -1.70) at high intensity. Atorvastatin and simvastatin at any intensity and pravastatin at low intensity were also effective in reducing levels of non-HDL-C. In 4670 patients at greater risk of a major cardiovascular events, atorvastatin at high intensity showed the largest reduction in levels of non-HDL-C (-1.98, -4.16 to 0.26, surface under the cumulative ranking curve 64%). Simvastatin (-1.93, -2.63 to -1.21) and rosuvastatin (-1.76, -2.37 to -1.15) at high intensity were the most effective treatment options for reducing LDL-C. Significant reductions in non-fatal myocardial infarction were found for atorvastatin at moderate intensity compared with placebo (relative risk=0.57, confidence interval 0.43 to 0.76, n=4 studies). No significant differences were found for discontinuations, non-fatal stroke, and cardiovascular deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis indicated that rosuvastatin, at moderate and high intensity doses, and simvastatin and atorvastatin, at high intensity doses, were most effective at moderately reducing levels of non-HDL-C in patients with diabetes. Given the potential improvement in accuracy in predicting cardiovascular disease when reduction in levels of non-HDL-C is used as the primary target, these findings provide guidance on which statin types and intensities are most effective by reducing non-HDL-C in patients with diabetes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021258819.

Adiponectin and cardiometabolic trait and mortality: where do we go?

Adiponectin is an adipocyte-derived cytokine known for its cardioprotective effects in preclinical studies. Early epidemiologic studies replicated these findings and drew great interest. Subsequent large-scale prospective cohorts, however, showed that adiponectin levels seemed not to relate to incident coronary artery disease (CAD). Even more surprisingly, a paradoxical increase of all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality with increased adiponectin levels was reported. The adiponectin-mortality paradox has been explained by some groups asserting that adiponectin secretion is promoted by elevated natriuretic peptides (NP). Other groups have proposed that adiponectin is elevated due to adiponectin resistance in subjects with metabolic syndrome or heart failure (HF). However, there is no unifying theory that can clearly explain this paradox. In patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), stretched cardiomyocytes secrete NPs, which further promote release of adiponectin from adipose tissue, leading to adiponectin resistance. On the other hand, adiponectin biology may differ in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), which constitutes 50% of all of HF. Most HFpEF patients are obese, which exerts inflammation and myocardial stiffness, that is likely to prevent myocardial stretch and subsequent NP release. This segment of the patient population may display a different adiponectin biology from its HFrEF counterpart. Dissecting the adiponectin-mortality relation in terms of different HF subtypes may help to comprehensively understand this paradox. Mendelian Randomization (MR) analyses claimed that adiponectin levels are not causally related to CAD or metabolic syndrome. Results from MR studies, however, should be interpreted with great caution because the underlying history of CAD or CHF were not taken into account in these analyses, an issue that may substantially confound the results. Here, we discuss many aspects of adiponectin; cardiometabolic traits, therapeutic interventions, and the ongoing debate about the adiponectin paradox, which were recently described in basic, epidemiologic, and clinical studies.

Strategies to ameliorate endothelial dysfunction associated with metabolic syndrome, where are we?

There is a paucity of aggregated clinical trials on strategies of ameliorating endothelial dysfunction associated with Metabolic Syndrome (MS). We reviewed clinical trials conducted between 2008 and 2017, reporting on strategies of improving endothelial function in patients with MS. A comprehensive search of published articles by the Google Scholar and PubMed were carried out. Only studies involving non-invasive, objective measurement of endothelial function were included. Thirty (30) studies were selected for analysis, in which physical exercise training, diet modification, calcium channel blockers + alpha-lipoic acid, bezafibrate, allopurinol, mesoglycan, and l-arginine supplementation significantly improved Endothelial-Dependent Vasodilation (EDV) in patients with MS but without cardiovascular diseases. Large multicenter clinical trials are required to address the question of generalizability of these findings.

Effects of rosuvastatin on metabolic profile: Versatility of dose-dependent effect

Obesity refers to an excess of body fat content causing metabolic and inflammatory disorders. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate dose-dependent effect of rosuvastatin on the metabolic profile of diet-induced obesity in mice model study. A total number of 40 male Albino Swiss mice were used which divided into Group I: Control group, fed normal diet for 8 weeks (n = 10); Group II: High-fat diet (HFD) group, fed on HFD for 8 weeks (n = 10); Group III: HFD + 20 mg/kg rosuvastatin for 8 weeks (n = 10); and Group IV: HFD +40 mg/kg rosuvastatin for 8 weeks (n = 10). Anthropometric and biochemical parameters were estimated, including fasting blood glucose, lipid profile, fasting insulin, and glucose tolerance test (GTT). Mice on HFD fed showed a significant increase in the insulin resistance, body weight, deterioration of lipid profile and significant reduction in the β-cell function, and insulin sensitivity compared to the control P < 0.05. GTT and blood glucose level were significantly high in HFD fed group compared to the control group P < 0.05. Rosuvastatin in a dose of 40 mg/kg illustrated better effect than 20 mg/kg on the glucometabolic profile P < 0.05. Rosuvastatin may has a potential effect on reduction of glucometabolic changes induced by HFD with significant amelioration of pancreatic β-cell function in dose-dependent manner.

Increase in Adiponectin Level Prevents the Development of Type 2 Diabetes in Japanese Men With Low Adiponectin Levels

Context

Low serum adiponectin (Ad) level is an important risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Objective

To determine whether the changes in Ad in subjects with low baseline serum Ad levels can reduce the rate of development of T2DM.

Design/Setting/Participants

We performed a large-scale longitudinal study of 7052 healthy Japanese men who underwent general health checkups more than twice between April 2007 and May 2015 at the Physical Check up Center, Sumitomo Hospital. The participants were divided into quartile groups according to baseline Ad level. Subjects of the lowest baseline Ad group (≤5.2 μg/mL) were subdivided into quartile subgroups according to the percent change in Ad (%ΔAd) and into two subgroups according to endpoint Ad (>5.2 and ≤5.2 μg/mL).

Main Outcome Measures

The cumulative incidence rate of T2DM.

Results

The cumulative incidence rate of T2DM of the lowest baseline Ad group (≤5.2 μg/mL) was significantly higher than the other quartile groups. The cumulative incidence rates of T2DM were significantly lower in the largest (≥21.5%) and the second largest (9.3% to 21.4%) %ΔAd-increased subgroups compared with the %ΔAd-decreased subgroup (P < 0.001 and P = 0.005, respectively). The cumulative incidence rates of T2DM were significantly lower in the endpoint Ad >5.2 μg/mL subgroup than in the ≤5.2 μg/mL subgroup (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Increases in serum Ad levels of at least ~10% or >5.2 μg/mL can potentially reduce the risk of development of T2DM in Japanese men with low baseline Ad levels who are at a high risk of developing T2DM.

Best Treatment Strategies With Statins to Maximize the Cardiometabolic Benefits

Statins are important for preventing adverse cardiovascular events in patients with both high and low risk of vascular disease, by reducing the levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). However, statins dose-dependently increase adverse effects and increase the risk of type 2 diabetes. Previously, it was hypothesized this was caused by to off-target effects, but recent studies demonstrate it is caused by on-target effects. Nonetheless, the American guidelines recommend the use of high-intensity statin therapy, and extend its use to most people at risk of vascular diseases, particularly older people. In contrast, European, Korean, and Japanese committees have expressed concerns about the potential adverse effects of using high-intensity statins for lifelong periods in a large fraction of the population. Patients who have achieved LDL-C levels below currently recommended targets may still experience cardiovascular events, resulting from residual risk. Ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, inclisiran, and ANGPTL3 antisense oligonucleotides are promising alternative non-statin drugs. Of interest, cross-talk between hypercholesterolemia and the renin-angiotensin-system exists at multiple levels of insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction. There are still unanswered questions on how to maximize the cardiometabolic benefits of statins in patients. We will discuss the results of randomized clinical trials, meta-analysis, and recent clinicopharmacogenetic studies, and propose practical guidelines to maximize the cardiometabolic benefits while reducing adverse effects and overcoming residual risk.

Improvement of endothelial function by pitavastatin: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Dyslipidemia is commonly associated with endothelial dysfunction and increased cardiovascular risk. Pitavastatin has been shown to reduce total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, to increase high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol and improve HDL function. Furthermore, several trials explored its effects on flow-mediated dilation (FMD), as an index of endothelial function. The authors evaluated the effect of pitavastatin therapy on FMD.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all clinical trials exploring the impact of pitavastatin on FMD. The search included PubMed-Medline, Scopus, ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar databases. Quantitative data synthesis was performed using a random-effects model, with weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) as summary statistics.

RESULTS

Six eligible studies comprising 7 treatment arms were selected for this meta-analysis. Overall, WMD was significant for the effect of pitavastatin on FMD (2.45%, 95% CI: 1.31, 3.60, p < 0.001) and the effect size was robust in the leave-one-out sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis of all available clinical trials revealed a significant increase of FMD induced by pitavastatin.

Anthropometric dimensions provide reliable estimates of abdominal adiposity: A validation study

Abdominal fat accumulation is a major risk factor for cardiometabolic morbidity and mortality. The purpose of the study is to assess the possibility of developing accurate estimation equations based on body measurements to determine total abdominal (TFA), subcutaneous (SFA) and visceral fat area (VFA). Hungarian volunteers (n=198) aged between 20 and 81 years were enrolled in the study, which was conducted between July and November 2014. All persons underwent anthropometric measurements and computer tomographic (CT) scanning. Sex-specific multiple linear regression analyses were conducted in a subgroup of 98 participants to generate estimation models, then Bland-Altman's analyses were applied in the cross-validation group to compare their predictive efficiency. The variables best predicting VFA were hip circumference, calf circumference and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) for males (R²=0.713; SEE=5602.1mm²) and sagittal abdominal diameter (SAD), WHR, thigh circumference and triceps skinfold for females (R²=0.845; SEE=3835.6mm²). The SFA prediction equation included SAD, thigh circumference and abdominal skinfold for males (R²=0.848; SEE=4124.1mm²), body mass index and thigh circumference for females (R²=0.861; SEE=5049.7mm²). Prediction accuracy was the highest in the case of TFA: hip circumference and WHR for males (R²=0.910; SEE=5637.2mm²), SAD, thigh circumference and abdominal skinfold for females (R²=0.915; SEE=6197.5mm²) were used in the equations. The results suggested that deviations in the predictions were independent of the amount of adipose tissue. Estimation of abdominal fat depots based on anthropometric traits could provide a cheap, reliable method in epidemiologic research and public health screening to evaluate the risk of cardiometabolic events.

Combining Potent Statin Therapy with Other Drugs to Optimize Simultaneous Cardiovascular and Metabolic Benefits while Minimizing Adverse Events

Hypercholesterolemia and hypertension are among the most important risk factors for cardiovascular (CV) disease. They are also important contributors to metabolic diseases including diabetes that further increase CV risk. Updated guidelines emphasize targeted reduction of overall CV risks but do not explicitly incorporate potential adverse metabolic outcomes that also influence CV health. Hypercholesterolemia and hypertension have synergistic deleterious effects on interrelated insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction. Dysregulation of the renin-angiotensin system is an important pathophysiological mechanism linking insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction to atherogenesis. Statins are the reference standard treatment to prevent CV disease in patients with hypercholesterolemia. Statins work best for secondary CV prevention. Unfortunately, most statin therapies dose-dependently cause insulin resistance, increase new onset diabetes risk and exacerbate existing type 2 diabetes mellitus. Pravastatin is often too weak to achieve target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels despite having beneficial metabolic actions. Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors improve both endothelial dysfunction and insulin resistance in addition to controlling blood pressure. In this regard, combined statin-based and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor therapies demonstrate additive/synergistic beneficial effects on endothelial dysfunction, insulin resistance, and other metabolic parameters in addition to lowering both cholesterol levels and blood pressure. This combined therapy simultaneously reduces CV events when compared to either drug type used as monotherapy. This is mediated by both separate and interrelated mechanisms. Therefore, statin-based therapy combined with RAS inhibitors is important for developing optimal management strategies in patients with hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, or obesity. This combined therapy can help prevent or treat CV disease while minimizing adverse metabolic consequences.

Lipid-lowering drugs and risk of new-onset diabetes: a cohort study using Japanese healthcare data linked to clinical data for health screening

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether lipid-lowering drugs are associated with new-onset diabetes after adjusting for baseline clinical risk factors for diabetes.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Japanese employees of large corporations and their dependents using health insurance claims data linked to clinical and laboratory data for annual health screenings.

PARTICIPANTS

All persons aged 20 to 74 years with dyslipidaemia between 1 January 2005 and 31 March 2011. We defined the index date as the first date when the person met the criteria for dyslipidaemia. Persons were excluded if they had lipid-lowering drugs, or had a diagnosis, a treatment or a laboratory test result (haemoglobin A1c ≥6.5% or fasting blood glucose ≥126 mg/dL) indicating diabetes during the 6-month period before the index date.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

New-onset diabetes.

RESULTS

We identified 68 620 persons with dyslipidaemia. During the mean follow-up period of 1.96 years, 3674 persons started treatment with a lipid-lowering drug: 979 with a low potency statin, 2208 with a high potency statin and 487 with a fibrate. Of 3674 new users of a lipid-lowering drug, 3621 had a period of non-use of any lipid-lowering drugs before starting a lipid-lowering drug. Among statin users, the incidence rate of new-onset diabetes was 124.6 per 1000 person-years compared with 22.6 per 1000 person-years in non-users. After adjusting for confounding factors including clinical data in health screening using Cox proportional hazards models, the HR was 1.91 (95% CI 1.38 to 2.64) for low potency statins and 2.61 (2.11 to 3.23) for high potency statins.

CONCLUSION

The use of statins was associated with a 1.9-fold to 2.6-fold increase in the risk of new-onset diabetes in a Japanese population of working age, despite adjusting for clinical risk factors for diabetes.