Extended-Release Niacin Therapy and Risk of Ischemic Stroke in Patients With Cardiovascular Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: In Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic Syndrome with low HDL/High Triglycerides: Impact on Global Health Outcomes (AIM-HIGH) trial, addition of extended-release niacin (ERN) to simvastatin in participants with established cardiovascular disease, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high triglycerides had no incremental benefit, despite increases in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Preliminary analysis based on incomplete end point adjudication suggested increased ischemic stroke risk among participants randomized to ERN. METHODS: This final analysis was conducted after complete AIM-HIGH event ascertainment to further explore potential relationship between niacin therapy and ischemic stroke risk. RESULTS: There was no group difference in trial primary composite end point at a mean 36-month follow-up among 3414 patients (85% men; mean age, 64±9 years) randomized to simvastatin plus ERN (1500-2000 mg/d) versus simvastatin plus matching placebo. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there were 50 fatal or nonfatal ischemic strokes: 18 (1.06%) in placebo arm versus 32 (1.86%) in ERN arm (hazard ratio [HR], 1.78 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.00-3.17; P=0.050). Multivariate analysis showed independent associations between ischemic stroke risk and >65 years of age (HR, 3.58; 95% CI, 1.82-7.05; P=0.0002), history of stroke/transient ischemic attack/carotid disease (HR, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.23-3.88; P=0.0079), elevated baseline Lp(a) (HR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.25-6.27 comparing the middle with the lowest tertile; HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.002-5.30 comparing the highest with the lowest tertile; overall P=0.042) but a nonsignificant association with ERN (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.97-3.11; P=0.063). CONCLUSIONS: Although there were numerically more ischemic strokes with addition of ERN to simvastatin that reached nominal significance, the number was small, and multivariable analysis accounting for known risk factors did not support a significant association between niacin and ischemic stroke risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00120289.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".