Reduction of Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality Versus Risk of New‐Onset Diabetes Mellitus With Statin Use in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of statin use on the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), all-cause mortality, and type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We identified a cohort of patients with RA between 1989 and 2018, within the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We employed a prevalent new-user cohort design by which patients initiating statins were each matched to 2 concurrent nonusers by the time-conditional propensity score (TCPS). Patients were followed until the occurrence of the composite end point of myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalized heart failure or CVD mortality, all-cause mortality, and incident type 2 DM. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of each outcome associated with as-treated statin use, with adjustment for TCPS deciles and imbalanced covariables. RESULTS: Among 1,768 statin initiators and 3,528 nonusers, 63 versus 340 CVD (3.0 per 100 person-years versus 2.7 per 100 person-years) and 62 versus 525 deaths (2.8 per 100 person-years versus 4.1 per 100 person-years) occurred. Incident type 2 DM was noted in 128 of 3,608 statin initiators (3.0 per 100 person-years) and 518 of 7,208 nonusers (2.0 per 100 person-years). Statin initiation was associated with 32% (HR 0.68 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.51-0.90]) reduction in CVD, 54% (HR 0.46 [95% CI 0.35-0.60]) reduction in all-cause mortality, and 33% increase in type 2 DM (HR 1.33 [95% CI 1.09-1.63]). The number needed to treat/number needed to harm to prevent a CVD or all-cause mortality or to cause type 2 DM in 1 year was 102, 42, and 127, respectively. CONCLUSION: Statins are associated with important reductions in CVD and mortality that outweigh the modest increase in type 2 DM risk in RA patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".