Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Atorvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin: A Multi-database Cohort Study
Submit a Comment
Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest. Comments are moderated. Please see our information for authorsregarding comments on an Annals publication.
Visual Abstract. Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Atorvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin
Rosuvastatin and atorvastatin are the most widely prescribed moderate- to high-intensity statins, but evidence on their efficacy and safety during actual use is limited. This study compared the real-world effectiveness and safety of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin among adults with data in the China Renal Data System and UK Biobank databases.
Abstract
Background:
Rosuvastatin and atorvastatin are the most widely prescribed moderate- to high-intensity statins. However, evidence on their efficacy and safety during actual use is limited.
Objective:
To compare the real-world effectiveness and safety of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin.
Design:
Active comparator cohort study using target trial emulation.
Setting:
The China Renal Data System (CRDS) and UK Biobank (UKB) databases.
Participants:
Adults newly prescribed rosuvastatin or atorvastatin.
Measurements:
The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regressions were used after 1:1 multilevel propensity score matching.
Results:
Among the 285 680 eligible participants in both databases, 6-year all-cause mortality was lower for rosuvastatin than for atorvastatin (2.57 vs. 2.83 per 100 person-years in the CRDS database and 0.66 vs. 0.90 per 100 person-years in the UKB database), with differences in cumulative incidence of −1.03% (95% CI, −1.44% to −0.46%) in the CRDS database and −1.38% (CI, −2.50% to −0.21%) in the UKB database. For secondary outcomes in both databases, rosuvastatin conferred lower risks for major adverse cardiovascular events and major adverse liver outcomes. In the UKB database, the risk for development of type 2 diabetes mellitus was higher with rosuvastatin, and the 2 medications carried similar risks for development of chronic kidney disease and other statin-related adverse effects.
Limitation:
Possible residual confounding.
Conclusion:
This study found differences in risks for some important outcomes associated with rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. The differences were relatively small, and many did not meet traditional standards for statistical significance. Further research is needed to understand whether these findings can be used with confidence in clinical practice.
Primary Funding Source:
National Key R&D Program of China and National Natural Science Foundation of China.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Supplemental Material
Supplemental Material
- Download
- 1.94 MB
References
1.
Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Nicholson WK, et al; US Preventive Services Task Force. Statin use for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA. 2022;328:746-753. [PMID: 35997723] doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.13044
2.
Berne C, Siewert-Delle A; URANUS study investigators. Comparison of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin for lipid lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: results from the URANUS study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2005;4:7. [PMID: 15935095] doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-4-7
3.
Lee Y-J, Hong S-J, Kang WC, et al; LODESTAR investigators. Rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin treatment in adults with coronary artery disease: secondary analysis of the randomised LODESTAR trial. BMJ. 2023;383:e075837. [PMID: 37852649] doi: 10.1136/bmj-2023-075837
4.
Nicholls SJ, Ballantyne CM, Barter PJ, et al. Effect of two intensive statin regimens on progression of coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:2078-2087. [PMID: 22085316] doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1110874
5.
Nicholls SJ, Brandrup-Wognsen G, Palmer M, et al. Meta-analysis of comparative efficacy of increasing dose of atorvastatin versus rosuvastatin versus simvastatin on lowering levels of atherogenic lipids (from VOYAGER). Am J Cardiol. 2010;105:69-76. [PMID: 20102893] doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.08.651
6.
Rosenson RS, Otvos JD, Hsia J. Effects of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin on LDL and HDL particle concentrations in patients with metabolic syndrome: a randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1087-1091. [PMID: 19265025] doi: 10.2337/dc08-1681
7.
Stalenhoef AFH, Ballantyne CM, Sarti C, et al. A comparative study with rosuvastatin in subjects with metabolic syndrome: results of the COMETS study. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:2664-2672. [PMID: 16143705] doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi482
8.
Stender S, Schuster H, Barter P, et al; MERCURY I Study Group. Comparison of rosuvastatin with atorvastatin, simvastatin and pravastatin in achieving cholesterol goals and improving plasma lipids in hypercholesterolaemic patients with or without the metabolic syndrome in the MERCURY I trial. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2005;7:430-438. [PMID: 15955130] doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2004.00450.x
9.
Naci H, Brugts JJ, Fleurence R, et al. Comparative benefits of statins in the primary and secondary prevention of major coronary events and all-cause mortality: a network meta-analysis of placebo-controlled and active-comparator trials. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2013;20:641-657. [PMID: 23447425] doi: 10.1177/2047487313480435
10.
Yebyo HG, Aschmann HE, Kaufmann M, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety of statins as a class and of specific statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis of randomized trials with 94,283 participants. Am Heart J. 2019;210:18-28. [PMID: 30716508] doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2018.12.007
11.
Wolffenbuttel BHR, Franken AAM, Vincent HH; Dutch CORALL Study Group. Cholesterol-lowering effects of rosuvastatin compared with atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes – CORALL study. J Intern Med. 2005;257:531-539. [PMID: 15910557] doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2796.2005.01499.x
12.
Kumar A, Shariff M, Doshi R. Impact of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on coronary atherosclerotic plaque volume - a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of randomized control trials. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2020;27:2138-2141. [PMID: 31382809] doi: 10.1177/2047487319868035
13.
Puri R, Nissen SE, Ballantyne CM, et al. Factors underlying regression of coronary atheroma with potent statin therapy. Eur Heart J. 2013;34:1818-1825. [PMID: 23644179] doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht084
14.
Werida R, Khairat I, Khedr NF. Effect of atorvastatin versus rosuvastatin on inflammatory biomarkers and LV function in type 2 diabetic patients with dyslipidemia. Biomed Pharmacother. 2021;135:111179. [PMID: 33401219] doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2020.111179
15.
de Zeeuw D, Anzalone DA, Cain VA, et al. Renal effects of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in patients with diabetes who have progressive renal disease (PLANET I): a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015;3:181-190. [PMID: 25660356] doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(14)70246-3
16.
Shin J-I, Fine DM, Sang Y, et al. Association of rosuvastatin use with risk of hematuria and proteinuria. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2022;33:1767-1777. [PMID: 35853713] doi: 10.1681/ASN.2022020135
17.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al; STROBE Initiative. The STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370:1453-1457. [PMID: 18064739] doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61602-X
18.
The CRDS Investigators. China Renal Data System. Accessed at www.crds-network.org.cn/#/database on 25 September 2024.
19.
Zhou S, Su L, Xu R, et al. Statin initiation and risk of incident kidney disease in patients with diabetes. CMAJ. 2023;195:E729-E738. [PMID: 37247880] doi: 10.1503/cmaj.230093
20.
Wu C, Zhang Y, Nie S, et al. Predicting in-hospital outcomes of patients with acute kidney injury. Nat Commun. 2023;14:3739. [PMID: 37349292] doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-39474-6
21.
Xu X, Nie S, Xu H, et al. Detecting neonatal AKI by serum cystatin C. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2023;34:1253-1263. [PMID: 36977125] doi: 10.1681/ASN.0000000000000125
22.
Liu S, Wu X, Lopez AD, et al. An integrated national mortality surveillance system for death registration and mortality surveillance, China. Bull World Health Organ. 2016;94:46-57. [PMID: 26769996] doi: 10.2471/BLT.15.153148
23.
Zhou M, Wang H, Zhu J, et al. Cause-specific mortality for 240 causes in China during 1990–2013: a systematic subnational analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2016;387:251-272. [PMID: 26510778] doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00551-6
24.
Danaei G, Tavakkoli M, Hernán MA. Bias in observational studies of prevalent users: lessons for comparative effectiveness research from a meta-analysis of statins. Am J Epidemiol. 2012;175:250-262. [PMID: 22223710] doi: 10.1093/aje/kwr301
25.
Sudlow C, Gallacher J, Allen N, et al. UK Biobank: an open access resource for identifying the causes of a wide range of complex diseases of middle and old age. PLoS Med. 2015;12:e1001779. [PMID: 25826379] doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001779
26.
Richardson TL Jr, Halvorson AE, Hackstadt AJ, et al. Primary occurrence of cardiovascular events after adding sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: a cohort study in veterans with diabetes. Ann Intern Med. 2023;176:751-760. [PMID: 37155984] doi: 10.7326/M22-2751
27.
Ebrahimi F, Hagström H, Sun J, et al. Familial coaggregation of MASLD with hepatocellular carcinoma and adverse liver outcomes: nationwide multigenerational cohort study. J Hepatol. 2023;79:1374-1384. [PMID: 37647992] doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2023.08.018
28.
Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD Work Group. KDIGO 2024 clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int. 2024;105:S117-S314. [PMID: 38490803] doi: 10.1016/j.kint.2023.10.018
29.
American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2015;38 Suppl:S8-S16. [PMID: 25537714] doi: 10.2337/dc15-S005
30.
Ihle P, Dippel FW, Schubert I. Statin-associated myopathy. Assessment of frequency based on data of all statutory health insurance funds in Germany. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2018;6:e00404. [PMID: 29760929] doi: 10.1002/prp2.404
31.
Zubizarreta JR, Stuart EA, Small DS, et al. Handbook of Matching and Weighting Adjustments for Causal Inference. Chapman & Hall; 2023.
32.
Griswold ME, Localio AR, Mulrow C. Propensity score adjustment with multilevel data: setting your sites on decreasing selection bias. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:393-395. [PMID: 20231571] doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-6-201003160-00010
33.
Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med. 2009;28:3083-3107. [PMID: 19757444] doi: 10.1002/sim.3697
34.
Li F, Thomas LE, Li F. Addressing extreme propensity scores via the overlap weights. Am J Epidemiol. 2019;188:250-257. [PMID: 30189042] doi: 10.1093/aje/kwy201
35.
Ray WA, Chung CP, Stein CM, et al. Risk for bleeding-related hospitalizations during use of amiodarone with apixaban or rivaroxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation: a retrospective cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2023;176:769-778. [PMID: 37216662] doi: 10.7326/M22-3238
36.
Thomas LE, Li F, Pencina MJ. Overlap weighting: a propensity score method that mimics attributes of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323:2417-2418. [PMID: 32369102] doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.7819
37.
van Klaveren D, Varadhan R, Kent DM. The Predictive Approaches to Treatment effect Heterogeneity (PATH) statement. Ann Intern Med. 2020;172:776. [PMID: 32479147] doi: 10.7326/L20-0427
38.
Rekkas A, van Klaveren D, Ryan PB, et al. A standardized framework for risk-based assessment of treatment effect heterogeneity in observational healthcare databases. NPJ Digit Med. 2023;6:58. [PMID: 36991144] doi: 10.1038/s41746-023-00794-y
39.
Stekhoven DJ, Bühlmann P. MissForest—non-parametric missing value imputation for mixed-type data. Bioinformatics. 2012;28:112-118. [PMID: 22039212] doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btr597
40.
Ghaisas MM, Dandawate PR, Zawar SA, et al. Antioxidant, antinociceptive and anti-inflammatory activities of atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in various experimental models. Inflammopharmacology. 2010;18:169-177. [PMID: 20532641] doi: 10.1007/s10787-010-0044-6
41.
Ridker PM; JUPITER Study Group. Rosuvastatin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease among patients with low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein: rationale and design of the JUPITER trial. Circulation. 2003;108:2292-2297. [PMID: 14609996] doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000100688.17280.E6
42.
Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FAH, et al; JUPITER Study Group. Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and women with elevated C-reactive protein. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2195-2207. [PMID: 18997196] doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807646
43.
Carswell CI, Plosker GL, Jarvis B. Rosuvastatin. Drugs. 2002;62:2075-2085. [PMID: 12269853] doi: 10.2165/00003495-200262140-00008
44.
Ciardullo S, Perseghin G. Statin use is associated with lower prevalence of advanced liver fibrosis in patients with type 2 diabetes. Metabolism. 2021;121:154752. [PMID: 33716004] doi: 10.1016/j.metabol.2021.154752
45.
Wu S-Y, Chen W-M, Chiang M-F, et al. Protective effects of statins on the incidence of NAFLD-related decompensated cirrhosis in T2DM. Liver Int. 2023;43:2232-2244. [PMID: 37381761] doi: 10.1111/liv.15656
46.
Schachter M. Chemical, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of statins: an update. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2005;19:117-125. [PMID: 15660968] doi: 10.1111/j.1472-8206.2004.00299.x
47.
Stein B, Ward T, Hale G, et al. Safety of high-intensity statins in the veteran population: atorvastatin 40 to 80 mg compared with rosuvastatin 20 to 40 mg. Ann Pharmacother. 2020;54:405-413. [PMID: 31718234] doi: 10.1177/1060028019888487
48.
Han E, Kim G, Lee JY, et al. Comparison between atorvastatin and rosuvastatin in renal function decline among patients with diabetes. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul). 2017;32:274-280. [PMID: 28685516] doi: 10.3803/EnM.2017.32.2.274
49.
Seo W-W, Seo SI, Kim Y, et al. Impact of pitavastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus compared to atorvastatin and rosuvastatin: a distributed network analysis of 10 real-world databases. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2022;21:82. [PMID: 35606846] doi: 10.1186/s12933-022-01524-6
50.
Betteridge DJ, Carmena R. The diabetogenic action of statins - mechanisms and clinical implications. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2016;12:99-110. [PMID: 26668119] doi: 10.1038/nrendo.2015.194
51.
Istvan ES, Deisenhofer J. Structural mechanism for statin inhibition of HMG-CoA reductase. Science. 2001;292:1160-1164. [PMID: 11349148] doi: 10.1126/science.1059344
52.
Liao JK, Laufs U. Pleiotropic effects of statins. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2005;45:89-118. [PMID: 15822172] doi: 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.45.120403.095748
53.
Corn G, Melbye M, Hlatky MA, et al. Association between age and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol response to statins: a Danish nationwide cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2023;176:1017-1026. [PMID: 37523692] doi: 10.7326/M22-2643
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Annals of Internal Medicine
Volume 177 • Number 12 • December 2024
Pages: 1641 - 1651
History
Published online: 29 October 2024
Published in issue: December 2024
Keywords
Copyright
© 2024 American College of Physicians.
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. For an editable text file, please select Medlars format which will download as a .txt file. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
Download article citation data for:
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Atorvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin: A Multi-database Cohort Study. Ann Intern Med.2024;177:1641-1651. [Epub 29 October 2024]. doi:10.7326/M24-0178
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Atorvastatin Versus Rosuvastatin: A Multi-database Cohort Study. Ann Intern Med.2024;177:1641-1651. [Epub 29 October 2024]. doi:10.7326/M24-0178
View More
Login Options:
Purchase
You will be redirected to acponline.org to sign-in to Annals to complete your purchase.
Access to EPUBs and PDFs for FREE Annals content requires users to be registered and logged in. A subscription is not required. You can create a free account below or from the following link. You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals. If you are accessing the Free Annals content via your institution's access, registration is not required.
Create your Free Account
You will be redirected to acponline.org to create an account that will provide access to Annals.
Comments
0 Comments