<i>N</i>-of-1 (Single-Patient) Trials for Statin-Related Myalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Statin-related myalgia is difficult to distinguish from other conditions causing myalgia and may often lead to statin discontinuation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of statin rechallenge with placebo in patients with prior statin-related myalgia and to determine whether patients resumed statin therapy after evaluating the results. DESIGN: N-of-1 trial with 3 double-blind, crossover comparisons separated by 3-week washout periods. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01259791) SETTING: Tertiary care lipid clinic. PATIENTS: Patients with prior statin-related myalgia with or without mild elevation of creatine kinase levels. INTERVENTION: Rechallenge with the statin that was previously associated with myalgia within 3 weeks of open-label use versus matching placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Weekly visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for myalgia and specific symptoms (VAS myalgia score and symptom-specific VAS score, respectively), pain interference scores, and pain severity scores were recorded during the 3-week periods when patients were receiving placebo or statin. The primary outcome was the VAS myalgia score (range, 0 to 100 mm). RESULTS: Eight patients (mean age, 66 years [SD, 8 years]; 88% women, all with high 10-year Framingham cardiovascular risk) participated in n-of-1 trials. Seven patients completed 3 treatment pairs, and 1 completed 2 treatment pairs. For each n-of-1 trial, no statistically significant differences were seen between statin and placebo in the VAS myalgia score, symptom-specific VAS score, pain interference score, and pain severity score. Five patients resumed open-label statin treatment, with a median posttrial follow-up of 10 months. LIMITATION: Results are limited by the small sample size and cannot be extended to patients with longer onset of myalgia after statin initiation. CONCLUSION: In selected patients with a history of statin-related myalgia whose symptoms are difficult to evaluate, n-of-1 trials may be a useful method for determining statin tolerability. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".