2015
DOI: 10.1007/s11606-015-3335-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statins and New-Onset Diabetes Mellitus and Diabetic Complications: A Retrospective Cohort Study of US Healthy Adults

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Statin use is associated with increased incidence of diabetes and possibly with increased body weight and reduced exercise capacity. Data on the longterm effects of these associations in healthy adults, however, are very limited. In addition, the relationship between these effects and diabetic complications has not been adequately studied. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between statin use and new-onset diabetes, diabetic complications, and overweight/obesity in a cohort of healthy adults. RE… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

5
64
0
3

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 69 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
(69 reference statements)
5
64
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Compared with RCTs, observational studies include, in fact, many more subjects followed for a longer time which may result in an increased chance to detect adverse events, in particular those that may require several years to occur or be detected, such as diabetes [16]. Furthermore, the rigorous selection of subjects recruited for an RCT may lead to the exclusion of individuals at higher risk for adverse events [16], and this may result in an underestimation of adverse events, in particular if their incidence is low.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Compared with RCTs, observational studies include, in fact, many more subjects followed for a longer time which may result in an increased chance to detect adverse events, in particular those that may require several years to occur or be detected, such as diabetes [16]. Furthermore, the rigorous selection of subjects recruited for an RCT may lead to the exclusion of individuals at higher risk for adverse events [16], and this may result in an underestimation of adverse events, in particular if their incidence is low.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have several limitations that might reduce the actual relevance of such increased risk [16]. RCTs in fact, did not include diabetes risk as a primary outcome; as a consequence, they could not reach adequate statistical power and sample size to find an association between statin use and diabetes risk.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The study by Mansi et al 8 calls for more consideration of the consequences of statin treatment, particularly in primary prevention for patients at risk of developing diabetes (overweight/obese older individuals), and potentially on the development of microangiopathic complications, although these risks are far from established on the basis of this study and should be the subject of more rigorous prospective trials. Physicians should not alter their current practices based on this study, as the benefit of statin treatment on cardiovascular events has been rigorously demonstrated in multiple prospective intervention studies in diabetic patients over the last 20 years.…”
mentioning
confidence: 92%
“…7 A new dimension in this saga is suggested in this issue of JGIM by Mansi et al, who report that statin use may be associated with diabetic complications in a retrospective cohort study of adult patients enrolled in the US military's Tricare program in San Antonio, TX. 8 The authors selected patients without cardiovascular problems or significant comorbid conditions and, using propensity scores to match the two groups, selected 3351 statin users and 3351 non-users. After follow-up of 6.5 years, the authors observed that statin users had an odds ratio (OR) of 1.87 for diabetes (30.9 % versus 19.4 %), 2.5 for diabetic complications (5.0 % versus 2.1 %), and 1.14 for overweight/obesity (46.7 % versus 43.4 %) compared to non-users.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation