HEALTH AND SAFETY

» Drug, Devices, and Supplements

» Physician Accountability

» Consumer Product Safety

» Worker Safety

» Health Care Delivery

» Auto and Truck Safety

» Global Access to Medicines

» Infant Formula Marketing

 

More Information on atorvastatin (Lipitor)

More Information on Cerivastatin (Baycol)

More information on fluvastatin (Lescol)

More information on lovastatin (Mevacor)

More information on pravastatin (Pravachol)

More information on simvastatin (Zocor)

Letter in Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety: Statin-Associated Rhabdomyolysis

April 5, 2005 

This Letter to the Editor appeared in the April 2005 issue of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety.

Full Citation
Ardati A, Stolley P, Knapp DE, Wolfe SM, Lurie P. Statin-associated rhabdomyolyis (letter). Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety 2005;14:287.

We read with great interest the study of Chang et al. on rhabdomyolysis and statins.1 When our group studied the Food and Drug Administration’s Adverse Event Reporting System database for statin-associated rhabdomyolysis, we did not use a strict CPK cut-off to identify rhabdomyolysis cases the way Chang did. Twenty-eight percent of cases did not include CPK data. Thus, by using clinician-defined cases of rhabdomyolysis as our entry criterion, our study likely includes cases that more closely resemble those encountered by primary practitioners who prescribe the majority of statin medications.

We identified 936 cases of rhabdomyolysis between October 1997 and December 2000, of which noncerivastatin-related cases accounted for 456 (47%). Non-cerivastatin cases had a median peak CPK value of 15 080 IU/L with 38% of cases having peak CPK values ≤10 000 IU/L (the cut-off used by Chang), while the median peak CPK for cerivastatin cases was 35 000 (13%≤10 000 IU/L). Using this larger data set, we also found that the noncerivastatin associated cases had much longer median times to disease onset than the cerivastatin cases (208 vs. 31 days). Like Chang, we found that mortality was higher in the non-cerivastatin group, occurring in 12% of rhabdomyolysis cases compared to 4% of cerivastatin cases.

We also found that 54% of cerivastatin associated cases occurred in the context of concomitant fibrate use. However, when comparing fibrate- and non-fibrate associated cerivastatin cases, we found no difference in time to disease onset, median peak CPK levels, or the rates of hospitalization, death, acute renal failure or dialysis. The clinical picture of toxicity with cerivastatin appears to be largely due to cerivastatin itself.

We conclude that, compared to other statin drugs, cerivastatin-associated rhabdomyolysis is notable for a shorter time to onset, higher median peak CPK levels, more concomitant fibrate use and lower case-fatality percentages. Statin-induced rhabdomyolysis with the currently available statins typically occurs after long periods of event-free use, underscoring the need for active vigilance by clinicians.

Amer Ardati, M.D.
Public Citizen's Health Research Group

Paul Stolley, M.D.
Public Citizen's Health Research Group

Deanne E. Knapp, Ph.D.
Public Citizen's Health Research Group

Sidney M. Wolfe, M.D.
Public Citizen's Health Research Group

Peter Lurie, M.D., M.P.H.

Public Citizen's Health Research Group

Reference
1. Chang JT, Staffa JA, Parks M, Green L. Rhabdomyolysis with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors and gemfibrozil combination therapy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safe 2004; 13: 417–426.

Copyright © 2014 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.


Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation

 

Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.

 

To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.