Clinical Effects of the Concurrent Ingestion of Rosuvastatin and Magnesium Oxide: A Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-Group Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a leading global cause of mortality. Statins, particularly rosuvastatin (RSV), are widely used to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level and prevent atherosclerotic CVD. RSV is highly liver-selective, hydrophilic, and primarily transported via organic anion transport proteins, rendering it less prone to cytochrome P450-mediated drug interactions. However, the concurrent use with magnesium oxide (MgO), a common antacid and laxative, has been shown to decrease RSV absorption by up to 50%, raising concerns regarding the clinical efficacy of RSV in patients taking MgO. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, parallel-group comparative trial included outpatients prescribed both RSV and MgO at Fukuoka University Chikushi and Fukuoka Tokushukai Hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned to the control group with simultaneous administration or the intervention group with staggered administration of MgO at least 2 h after RSV. Data on demographics and serum levels of LDL-C, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides were collected at baseline and 12 weeks after study initiation. Medication adherence was monitored using a self-reported medication checklist, and patients with ≥ 80% compliance were included in the final analysis. Results: A total of 45 patients, including 25 and 20 patients in the control and intervention groups, respectively, completed the study. The median ages were 78 and 76 years in the control and intervention groups, respectively. The baseline demographics and clinical parameters, including LDL-C, were not significantly different between the two groups. After 12 weeks, the rate of change in LDL-C level was not significantly between the control and intervention groups (P = 0.9091). Conclusion: The concurrent use of RSV and MgO did not significantly impact the reduction in LDL-C levels compared with the staggered administration. Simplifying administration without altering efficacy can improve medication adherence, particularly in elderly patients and those with polypharmacy, by reducing treatment complexity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".