Library › Pharmacology › Statins

Statins: pharmacology, intensity, intolerance, and interactions

The seven US statins from mechanism and pharmacokinetics through dose intensity, outcome evidence, selection in comorbid disease, muscle and other adverse effects, rechallenge, monitoring, and drug interactions.

Statins available in the United States and their place in therapy

Statins are competitive inhibitors of HMG-CoA reductase and are the foundation of drug therapy to lower LDL-C and reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events. Lovastatin, derived from a fungal metabolite, was the first statin approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in 1987. Simvastatin and pravastatin followed in 1991, fluvastatin in 1993, atorvastatin in 1996, rosuvastatin in 2003, and pitavastatin in 2009. Cerivastatin was withdrawn worldwide in 2001 after fatal rhabdomyolysis, many cases occurring in combination with gemfibrozil. Seven statins are therefore marketed: atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, fluvastatin, and pitavastatin, alone and in fixed-dose combinations with ezetimibe (simvastatin) or amlodipine (atorvastatin); the atorvastatin-ezetimibe and rosuvastatin-ezetimibe tablets have been discontinued in the United States.

The statins differ in potency, in the route by which they are cleared, and in their susceptibility to drug interactions; they do not differ in the mechanism of benefit. Every statin lowers events in proportion to the absolute LDL-C reduction it produces. The choice of drug and dose is therefore governed by the LDL-C reduction required, the interaction profile of the patient's other medicines, kidney and liver function, ancestry, and tolerability. The 2026 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) multisociety dyslipidemia guideline replaced the 2018 cholesterol guideline. It keeps statins as first-line therapy in every risk group and adds LDL-C and non–high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) goals that statins alone often do not reach. Who is treated and the goal for each risk group are covered on the dyslipidemia and LDL lowering page; this page covers the drugs themselves.

Mechanism: HMG-CoA reductase inhibition and LDL receptor upregulation

HMG-CoA reductase catalyzes the conversion of HMG-CoA to mevalonate, the committed and rate-limiting step of the mevalonate pathway. Downstream, mevalonate is converted to isoprenoid intermediates (isopentenyl pyrophosphate, farnesyl pyrophosphate, and geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate). These feed cholesterol synthesis and also ubiquinone (coenzyme Q10), dolichol, and the lipid anchors that attach small guanosine triphosphate (GTP)–binding proteins such as Ras, Rho, and Rac to cell membranes. Statins contain a dihydroxy-acid moiety that mimics the mevalonate intermediate and binds the active site with an affinity several orders of magnitude greater than that of the natural substrate. Simvastatin and lovastatin are given as inactive lactone prodrugs and are hydrolyzed to the active hydroxy acid; the other statins are administered as the active acid.

The LDL-lowering effect is indirect. Reduced hepatocyte cholesterol is sensed in the endoplasmic reticulum by the SREBP cleavage-activating protein, which releases sterol regulatory element-binding protein 2 (SREBP-2) for transport to the Golgi apparatus and cleavage. The active transcription factor increases expression of the LDL receptor gene, and more receptors on the sinusoidal membrane clear LDL, intermediate-density lipoprotein, and very-low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) remnants from plasma. Hepatic secretion of VLDL also falls. LDL-C and apolipoprotein B fall in a dose-dependent manner, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) rises by about 5% to 10%. Triglycerides fall in proportion to the baseline level, slightly when triglycerides are normal and by about 20% to 30% when they are high. Statins do not lower lipoprotein(a), and several raise it modestly.

SREBP-2 also increases transcription of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9), which binds the LDL receptor and directs it to lysosomal degradation. The statin-induced rise in PCSK9 is one reason for the shallow dose-response curve described in the section on intensity, and it is the biological basis for the additive effect of PCSK9-directed therapy. Intestinal cholesterol absorption increases when hepatic synthesis is suppressed, which explains why ezetimibe adds a further 20% to 25% reduction when combined with a statin.

The proportion of LDL-C reduction achieved by any statin varies widely between patients. Inherited differences in cholesterol synthesis and absorption, the SLCO1B1 and ABCG2 transporter genotypes, the contribution of lipoprotein(a) cholesterol to the measured LDL-C, and adherence all contribute. Patients with homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia who lack functional LDL receptors respond poorly, because the main mechanism of action depends on receptor upregulation.

Pleiotropic effects: endothelial function, inflammation, and plaque stabilization

Isoprenoid depletion has effects beyond cholesterol synthesis. Reduced geranylgeranylation of RhoA inhibits the Rho kinase pathway, which increases endothelial nitric oxide synthase expression and nitric oxide bioavailability; statins also reduce vascular nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH) oxidase activity and oxidative stress. In experimental systems, statins reduce expression of adhesion molecules, macrophage matrix metalloproteinases, and tissue factor, and they shift plaque toward a smaller lipid core and a thicker fibrous cap. In patients, statins lower high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), by 37% with rosuvastatin 20 mg in JUPITER, and the hsCRP and LDL-C responses correlate only weakly. Statins also improve flow-mediated vasodilation within weeks and reduce arterial inflammation on fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography.

The clinical weight of these actions is uncertain. In the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) individual-participant analyses, the proportional reduction in major vascular events with statins is fully explained by the absolute LDL-C reduction. Nonstatin drugs that lower LDL-C by other mechanisms (ezetimibe, PCSK9 antibodies, bempedoic acid) produce the same benefit per unit of LDL-C lowering. JUPITER, which enrolled patients with LDL-C below 130 mg/dL and hsCRP of 2 mg/L or more, is often cited as evidence of an anti-inflammatory effect. Rosuvastatin also lowered LDL-C by half in that trial, so the two effects cannot be separated. The early separation of event curves after acute coronary syndrome in MIRACL and PROVE IT–TIMI 22, within weeks, is consistent with rapid effects on plaque biology but is also observed with other effective LDL-lowering therapy.

Pharmacokinetics: lipophilicity, metabolism, and half-life

All statins undergo extensive first-pass hepatic extraction, so their site of action is also their principal site of clearance and systemic exposure is low. Muscle toxicity depends on the concentration that escapes the liver into the systemic circulation, which is why drugs and genotypes that impair hepatic uptake or metabolism raise the risk of myopathy without improving LDL lowering.

Lipophilicity determines how statins enter cells. Lipophilic statins (simvastatin, lovastatin, atorvastatin, fluvastatin, and, to a lesser degree, pitavastatin) cross membranes by passive diffusion and reach extrahepatic tissues, including muscle. Hydrophilic statins (pravastatin and rosuvastatin) depend on active uptake by OATP1B1 (encoded by SLCO1B1) and are more hepatoselective. Hydrophilicity has not translated into a consistent difference in muscle symptoms or outcomes in randomized comparisons, and all statins are OATP1B1 substrates to some degree.

The route of metabolism determines the interaction profile. Simvastatin, lovastatin, and atorvastatin are metabolized by CYP3A4, and strong CYP3A4 inhibitors raise simvastatin and lovastatin exposure many-fold, atorvastatin exposure less. Fluvastatin is metabolized mainly by CYP2C9. Rosuvastatin is little metabolized (about 10%, by CYP2C9) and is cleared largely unchanged in bile; it is a substrate of OATP1B1 and of the efflux transporter breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP, encoded by ABCG2). Pravastatin is cleared by sulfation, isomerization, and renal excretion, with no meaningful cytochrome metabolism. Pitavastatin is glucuronidated by uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferases (UGT1A3 and UGT2B7) and only marginally metabolized by CYP2C9.

Pharmacokinetic values and dose adjustments from current US prescribing information for each statin (current labels on DailyMed). CrCl, creatinine clearance; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; BCRP, breast cancer resistance protein.

Timing of the dose. Hepatic cholesterol synthesis peaks at night. Statins with short half-lives (simvastatin and immediate-release lovastatin and fluvastatin) are labeled for evening administration, and lovastatin is taken with the evening meal because food increases its absorption. Atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and pitavastatin have long half-lives or long-lived active metabolites and produce the same LDL-C reduction at any time of day. Pravastatin labeling permits dosing at any time, although evening dosing was marginally more effective in the original studies.

Population differences. Rosuvastatin exposure is about twice as high in Asian patients as in White patients, and US labeling starts rosuvastatin at 5 mg in Asian patients and weighs the risks above 20 mg. Simvastatin labeling reports a myopathy incidence of about 0.24% in Chinese patients taking simvastatin 40 mg, compared with about 0.05% in non-Chinese patients, and advises against combining simvastatin with lipid-modifying doses of niacin in Chinese patients. Advanced age, small body size, female sex, hypothyroidism, and kidney or liver disease raise exposure or susceptibility and are risk factors for myopathy listed in every statin label.

Statin intensity by drug and dose

The ACC/AHA guidelines classify statin regimens by the average LDL-C reduction they produce. High-intensity therapy lowers LDL-C by 50% or more, moderate-intensity by 30% to 49%, and low-intensity by less than 30%. The 2026 guideline keeps these intensity categories in a table modified from the 2018 guideline and pairs them with absolute LDL-C goals. Intensity now serves two purposes: it sets the initial regimen for each risk group, and the expected percentage reduction is the yardstick for judging the measured response.

Statin intensity classes from the 2026 ACC/AHA multisociety dyslipidemia guideline (Table 6), modified from the 2018 guideline. Simvastatin 80 mg is not classified for new use because of its myopathy risk. Individual responses vary widely around these averages.

The intensity table is a classification, not a dose-response curve. The 2003 BMJ meta-analysis of 164 short-term placebo-controlled trials quantified the reduction produced by each statin at each dose, standardized to a pretreatment LDL-C of 4.8 mmol/L (186 mg/dL). Its values show the potency ranking (rosuvastatin, then atorvastatin, then simvastatin and lovastatin, then pravastatin and fluvastatin) and the shallow slope of the curve.

Average LDL-C reduction by statin and daily dose from the 2003 BMJ meta-analysis (Table 2). Pitavastatin was not included. In the 12-week comparison in its US prescribing information, pitavastatin 2 mg and 4 mg lowered LDL-C by 38% and 45%, and atorvastatin 10 mg and 20 mg by 38% and 44%. Pitavastatin 2 mg was noninferior to atorvastatin 10 mg, and 4 mg to atorvastatin 20 mg. The table's atorvastatin values (37% and 43%) are the meta-analysis estimates.

The rule of 6. Each doubling of a statin dose lowers LDL-C by roughly a further 6 percentage points; the original descriptions were a rule of 5 for some statins and of 7 for others. The largest effect is produced by the starting dose. An LDL-C 20% above goal on atorvastatin 40 mg does not reach goal when the dose is doubled, whereas ezetimibe, which removes about a fifth to a quarter of the remaining LDL-C, usually closes a gap of that size. Effects are multiplicative: a high-intensity statin halves LDL-C, ezetimibe removes about a fifth of the remainder, and a PCSK9 antibody removes about 60% of what is left. The three together leave about one-sixth of the starting value.

Expected response and hyporesponse. Response is judged 4 to 12 weeks after a statin is started or its dose changed. A reduction substantially smaller than expected for the prescribed intensity is most often explained by nonadherence. Other explanations are a baseline drawn during acute illness, an elevated lipoprotein(a) whose cholesterol content is included in the measured LDL-C, secondary causes such as hypothyroidism or nephrotic syndrome, and inherited hyporesponsiveness. Response varies widely around the average even in adherent patients, which is why the 2026 guideline pairs percentage reduction with an absolute goal.

Expected LDL-C reduction and interaction limits by statin and dose

The calculator estimates the intensity class, the average LDL-C reduction, and the expected on-treatment LDL-C for a statin regimen. It compares the expected value with an LDL-C goal from the 2026 ACC/AHA guideline and reports the US labeled limit for that statin with a selected interacting drug.

Average reductions from the 2003 BMJ meta-analysis (pitavastatin from US labeling); intensity classes from the 2026 ACC/AHA guideline; interaction limits from current US prescribing information and the 2016 AHA statement on statin interactions. The expected value is a population average, and the measured LDL-C 4 to 12 weeks after the change determines the next step. Simvastatin and lovastatin labeling for boosted protease inhibitors and strong CYP3A4 inhibitors is a contraindication; atorvastatin limits vary by antiviral regimen.

Secondary prevention trials: 4S, HPS, and the case for statins after an event

The modern era of lipid lowering began with the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Among 4,444 patients with angina or prior myocardial infarction and total cholesterol of 212 to 309 mg/dL, simvastatin 20 to 40 mg reduced all-cause mortality over a median of 5.4 years (8% versus 12%; relative risk 0.70). The benefit was driven by a 42% reduction in coronary death, with no increase in noncardiovascular death. The Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) trial and the Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) trial extended benefit to patients with average cholesterol levels after myocardial infarction or unstable angina.

The Heart Protection Study (HPS) randomized 20,536 adults with coronary disease, other occlusive arterial disease, or diabetes to simvastatin 40 mg or placebo. Over 5 years, all-cause mortality fell from 14.7% to 12.9% and major vascular events by about one-quarter. The proportional benefit was the same in patients whose pretreatment LDL-C was below 116 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L), in women, in adults older than 70 years, and in patients with diabetes without prior vascular disease. HPS ended the practice of reserving statins for patients with "high" cholesterol; the decision depends on absolute risk.

Intensive lipid-lowering trials: MIRACL, PROVE IT, A to Z, TNT, IDEAL, SEARCH, and IMPROVE-IT

Once statins were established, trials compared more with less intensive regimens. Their results, pooled in the CTT meta-analysis of five trials, showed a further 15% reduction in major vascular events with the more intensive regimen, corresponding to the additional LDL-C reduction achieved.

Randomized comparisons of statin intensity, and of statin with and without ezetimibe. ACS, acute coronary syndrome; MI, myocardial infarction; CK, creatine kinase; HR, hazard ratio; RR, relative risk.

Three lessons follow from these trials. First, the benefit of more intensive therapy is proportional to the extra LDL-C reduction: TNT and PROVE IT achieved differences of 24 to 33 mg/dL and reduced events, whereas SEARCH achieved only 14 mg/dL with a dose that carried a myopathy risk of nearly 1%. Second, high-intensity therapy is safe enough to start at once after an acute coronary syndrome, and the risk of recurrence is front-loaded, so the regimen is not titrated up over months. Third, the incremental benefit of IMPROVE-IT, with a nonstatin, matched the CTT relationship for statins, which supported the causal role of LDL-C itself and the later return to treatment goals.

Primary prevention trials: WOSCOPS, AFCAPS/TexCAPS, ASCOT-LLA, JUPITER, and HOPE-3

Statins reduce first events across a wide range of baseline LDL-C and risk. The proportional reduction per unit of LDL-C lowering is the same as in secondary prevention; the absolute reduction, and therefore the number needed to treat, depends on baseline risk.

Placebo-controlled primary prevention trials. HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein.

HOPE-3 enrolled a multiethnic population at an annual event rate near 1%, the risk at which statins are now offered after a clinician–patient discussion. Its result is the clearest randomized evidence for treating intermediate-risk adults with a moderate-intensity statin. Primary prevention in adults older than 75 years and in patients on dialysis has the weakest randomized support, as discussed in the sections on those populations.

Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' meta-analyses: benefit per mmol/L of LDL-C lowering

The CTT Collaboration pools individual participant data from the large statin trials. Its 2010 analysis of 26 trials and about 170,000 participants established the central quantitative relationship of lipid therapy. Each 1.0 mmol/L (about 39 mg/dL) reduction in LDL-C reduces major vascular events (coronary death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and ischemic stroke) by about 22% and all-cause mortality by about 10% over 5 years. The relationship was linear, with no threshold below which further lowering ceased to help, including in patients whose LDL-C was already below 77 mg/dL (2.0 mmol/L). The benefit accrued with time: the proportional reduction was smaller in the first year and larger in subsequent years, so the long-term effect of sustained lowering is greater than the 5-year trial estimate.

Later CTT analyses applied the same relationship across subgroups. Proportional reductions were similar in people whose 5-year risk of a major vascular event was below 10%, in women and men, and in people with and without diabetes. In older people, the proportional reduction was 21% per mmol/L overall, significant in every age group, with a trend to smaller benefit after age 75 in people without vascular disease. Statins did not increase cancer incidence or nonvascular mortality. The analyses also define the harms that randomized evidence supports: a small excess of new-onset diabetes, a small excess of muscle symptoms confined largely to the first year, and a small, uncertain excess of hemorrhagic stroke. These are covered in the sections on adverse effects.

The absolute benefit of a statin equals the baseline risk multiplied by the proportional reduction, which in turn depends on the absolute LDL-C reduction. A patient at 20% 10-year risk whose LDL-C falls by 2 mmol/L (about 78 mg/dL) has an expected relative reduction of roughly 40%, or 8 events prevented per 100 treated over 10 years. A patient at 5% risk whose LDL-C falls by 1 mmol/L gains a reduction of about 1 event per 100. This arithmetic underlies the risk-based approach of the US guideline.

Who receives a statin and at what intensity under the 2026 guideline

The 2026 ACC/AHA multisociety guideline assigns statin therapy without a risk calculation to adults with clinical ASCVD (high-intensity) and to adults with LDL-C of 190 mg/dL or higher (maximally tolerated statin). Statin therapy is also assigned without a risk calculation to adults aged 40 to 75 years with diabetes, stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease, or HIV infection. Other adults aged 30 to 79 years without ASCVD are assigned according to their 10-year ASCVD risk from the Predicting Risk of cardiovascular disease EVENTs (PREVENT) equations, which replaced the pooled cohort equations. A moderate-intensity statin is reasonable at borderline risk (3% to below 5%), at least a moderate-intensity statin is recommended at intermediate risk (5% to below 10%), and a high-intensity statin is recommended at 10% or higher. Risk-enhancing factors and coronary artery calcium refine the decision. Each group also carries an LDL-C goal (below 100, 70, or 55 mg/dL) and a non-HDL-C goal 30 mg/dL higher, and nonstatin therapy is added when the goal is not met on the maximally tolerated statin. The risk tiers, the PREVENT inputs, and the role of calcium scoring are detailed on the cardiovascular risk assessment page, and the goals and add-on sequence on the dyslipidemia and LDL lowering page.

Under goal-based therapy, the starting regimen is chosen with the goal in view. A patient with clinical ASCVD at very high risk and an untreated LDL-C of 140 mg/dL needs a reduction of more than 60% to reach a goal below 55 mg/dL, more than the average effect of any statin. Such patients start a high-intensity statin with the expectation of early combination therapy. The 2025 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) focused update likewise supports combination therapy during the index admission for acute coronary syndrome in patients unlikely to reach goal on a statin alone.

Choosing a statin: rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, and the alternatives

Rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin. These are the only statins capable of high-intensity therapy. Milligram for milligram, rosuvastatin is about two to four times as potent: in the 6-week STELLAR comparison, rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg lowered LDL-C by 46% to 55% and atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg by 37% to 51%. In SATURN, rosuvastatin 40 mg and atorvastatin 80 mg produced similar regression of coronary atheroma on intravascular ultrasound over 2 years (percent atheroma volume change −1.22% versus −0.99%; P=0.17), with on-treatment LDL-C of 62.6 and 70.2 mg/dL. The only outcome comparison, the open-label Korean LODESTAR trial, randomized 4,400 patients with coronary disease to rosuvastatin or atorvastatin within a treat-to-target or high-intensity strategy. The 3-year composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or coronary revascularization was similar (8.7% versus 8.2%; HR 1.06). Mean LDL-C was slightly lower with rosuvastatin (about 70 versus 73 mg/dL), and rosuvastatin was associated with more new-onset diabetes requiring medication (7.2% versus 5.3%) and cataract surgery (2.5% versus 1.5%). The trial enrolled only Korean patients.

The choice between the two therefore rests on other features. Atorvastatin needs no adjustment in kidney disease and has the larger outcome-trial base in secondary prevention and acute coronary syndrome. Rosuvastatin achieves a given reduction at a lower dose, is not a CYP3A4 substrate, and is the preferred high-intensity statin in patients taking CYP3A4 inhibitors. It is dose-limited in severe kidney impairment and in Asian patients, and its OATP1B1 and BCRP dependence makes it sensitive to cyclosporine, gemfibrozil, febuxostat, darolutamide, and several hepatitis C and HIV regimens. Both are generic and inexpensive.

Simvastatin and lovastatin. These are effective moderate-intensity statins with the most interactions. Simvastatin 80 mg carries the highest myopathy risk of any marketed regimen, and simvastatin labeling advises an alternative LDL-lowering treatment for patients who need high-intensity therapy or do not reach goal on 40 mg. Lovastatin is used mainly where cost or formulary constraints apply and is avoided with any strong CYP3A4 inhibitor.

Pravastatin. Pravastatin has the fewest pharmacokinetic interactions of the older statins, a long safety record (WOSCOPS, CARE, LIPID, PROSPER), and outcome evidence after heart transplantation. Its low potency (about 29% to 33% at 40 to 80 mg) limits it to moderate intensity. Its hydrophilicity and outcome data make it the statin most often continued during pregnancy when continuation is chosen.

Pitavastatin. Pitavastatin is glucuronidated, is unaffected by ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors in pharmacokinetic studies, and was tested in a dedicated outcome trial in people with HIV (REPRIEVE). It is moderate intensity at every dose. In the Japanese REAL-CAD trial of 13,054 patients with stable coronary disease, pitavastatin 4 mg reduced the primary composite compared with 1 mg (HR 0.81), a high-versus-low dose comparison in an Asian population. Pitavastatin is contraindicated with cyclosporine.

Fluvastatin. Fluvastatin is the least potent statin and the only one cleared mainly by CYP2C9. It is used chiefly as an alternative in patients who did not tolerate other statins. In the Assessment of Lescol in Renal Transplantation (ALERT) trial, fluvastatin reduced cardiac death or nonfatal myocardial infarction in kidney transplant recipients taking cyclosporine, although the primary composite end point was not significantly reduced.

Fixed-dose combinations and the polypill. Statin–ezetimibe combinations reduce pill burden when combination therapy is planned from the start. Polypills combine a statin with blood pressure–lowering drugs, with or without aspirin. In TIPS-3, a polypill containing simvastatin 40 mg, atenolol, hydrochlorothiazide, and ramipril reduced cardiovascular events in intermediate-risk adults without cardiovascular disease (HR 0.79), with a larger effect when aspirin was added. In SECURE, a polypill of aspirin, ramipril, and atorvastatin after myocardial infarction reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (HR 0.76) and improved adherence. Polypills are not widely available in the United States.

Early high-intensity statin therapy in acute coronary syndrome

The 2025 ACC/AHA acute coronary syndrome guideline recommends high-intensity statin therapy for all patients with acute coronary syndrome, started or continued during the index hospitalization (Class 1). Patients already taking a statin are switched to a high-intensity regimen. A lipid panel is drawn early in admission, ideally within 24 hours, because LDL-C falls during the acute phase; the value is used to estimate the reduction required. When LDL-C remains 70 mg/dL or higher on maximally tolerated statin therapy, adding a nonstatin agent is recommended, and addition is reasonable at 55 to 69 mg/dL. Lipids are rechecked 4 to 8 weeks after the event or after any change.

The evidence for early initiation comes from MIRACL and PROVE IT–TIMI 22, in which atorvastatin 80 mg reduced recurrent ischemic events within weeks, and from observational data in which discontinuation of a statin during acute coronary syndrome was associated with higher early mortality. Pretreatment loading before percutaneous coronary intervention has not consistently changed outcomes; in the SECURE-PCI trial, two loading doses of atorvastatin 80 mg around planned intervention did not reduce 30-day events overall. Management of the acute syndrome is covered on the non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome and ST-elevation myocardial infarction pages.

Statins in chronic kidney disease and dialysis

Chronic kidney disease accelerates atherosclerosis and also changes statin handling. The 2026 guideline recommends a moderate-intensity statin, or a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe, for adults aged 40 to 75 years with stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease not on dialysis and LDL-C of 70 to 189 mg/dL (Class 1). It sets the goal below 55 mg/dL when chronic kidney disease accompanies clinical ASCVD. The Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP) is the principal outcome trial: among 9,270 patients with chronic kidney disease, about one-third on dialysis, simvastatin 20 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg reduced major atherosclerotic events by 17% (11.3% versus 13.4%) without excess myopathy or hepatotoxicity. Statins did not slow the decline in kidney function.

In patients already on maintenance hemodialysis, two placebo-controlled trials were neutral. In the German Diabetes and Dialysis Study (4D), atorvastatin 20 mg in 1,255 patients with type 2 diabetes did not reduce the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (relative risk 0.92), and fatal stroke was more frequent. In AURORA, rosuvastatin 10 mg in 2,776 hemodialysis patients did not reduce major cardiovascular events (HR 0.96). Much of the cardiovascular death in dialysis is sudden death and heart failure related to left ventricular hypertrophy, fibrosis, electrolyte shifts, and vascular calcification, which LDL lowering does not address. Statins are therefore not started for the first time in patients on dialysis without another indication, whereas continuing a statin begun before dialysis is reasonable; the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) lipid guideline takes the same position. Patients on dialysis with recent acute coronary syndrome or other clinical ASCVD are treated as for secondary prevention.

Statin dosing by kidney function from US prescribing information. Kidney impairment is a labeled risk factor for myopathy with every statin. Fluvastatin entry from older fluvastatin labeling. CrCl, creatinine clearance in mL/min; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate in mL/min/1.73 m².

Statin therapy with a fibrate needs particular care in kidney disease: fenofibrate is renally cleared, raises serum creatinine reversibly, and is dose-reduced or avoided at low eGFR. Kidney transplant recipients taking calcineurin inhibitors are managed as described in the section on transplantation. Dose adjustment of other cardiovascular drugs by kidney function is covered on the cardiovascular drug interactions and dosing page.

Statins in liver disease: steatotic liver disease, chronic hepatitis, and cirrhosis

Patients with chronic liver disease have a high burden of cardiovascular risk factors, and in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD, formerly nonalcoholic fatty liver disease) cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death. Statins are safe and indicated in these patients. Mild aminotransferase elevations from steatosis are not a contraindication; in observational analyses and post hoc trial analyses, statin-treated patients with steatotic liver disease had lower aminotransferase levels than untreated patients and fewer cardiovascular events. The 2018 ACC/AHA guideline found it reasonable to use statins in patients with chronic, stable liver disease, including nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, after baseline measurements and a monitoring schedule are established (Class 2a).

Statins are also used in compensated cirrhosis. Observational studies associate them with lower rates of decompensation, portal hypertensive bleeding, and death, and randomized trials of simvastatin in cirrhosis have tested these effects; the hepatology indication remains investigational. Decompensated cirrhosis and acute liver failure are labeled contraindications for every statin. Exposure rises in advanced liver disease: in a randomized trial in patients with Child-Pugh class B or C cirrhosis, simvastatin 40 mg combined with rifaximin caused rhabdomyolysis, whereas 20 mg was tolerated. Patients with Child-Pugh class B cirrhosis and a cardiovascular indication receive low doses, preferably of a hydrophilic statin, with clinical monitoring.

In chronic hepatitis B and C, statins are used as in the general population, with attention to antiviral interactions. Several direct-acting antiviral regimens for hepatitis C (elbasvir-grazoprevir, glecaprevir-pibrentasvir, sofosbuvir-velpatasvir, and ledipasvir-sofosbuvir) raise statin exposure through OATP1B1 and BCRP inhibition and carry statin-specific restrictions listed in the interaction table.

Statins in HIV infection

People with HIV have about 1.5 to 2 times the risk of ASCVD of people without HIV, related to chronic immune activation, antiretroviral effects, and a high prevalence of smoking. The 2026 guideline recommends statin therapy for adults aged 40 to 75 years with HIV on stable antiretroviral therapy, irrespective of LDL-C and without a risk calculation. The evidence is REPRIEVE: 7,769 participants with low to moderate traditional risk (median age 50 years) were randomized to pitavastatin 4 mg or placebo. Major adverse cardiovascular events fell from 7.32 to 4.81 per 1,000 person-years (HR 0.65), and the trial stopped early for efficacy. Muscle symptoms (2.3% versus 1.4%) and incident diabetes (5.3% versus 4.0%) were more frequent with pitavastatin, and the benefit was larger than expected from the LDL-C reduction alone.

Statin selection in HIV is governed by interactions. Ritonavir and cobicistat are strong CYP3A4 inhibitors and also inhibit OATP1B1, so every boosted regimen contraindicates simvastatin and lovastatin. Atorvastatin is limited to 20 mg with darunavir-, saquinavir-, or fosamprenavir-based regimens and to 40 mg with nelfinavir, and it is not recommended with tipranavir-ritonavir. Rosuvastatin is started at 5 mg and limited to 10 mg with atazanavir-ritonavir or lopinavir-ritonavir. Pitavastatin exposure is not increased by darunavir-ritonavir or lopinavir-ritonavir, and pravastatin has few interactions, which makes these two the simplest choices with boosted regimens. Integrase inhibitor–based regimens without a booster (bictegravir, dolutegravir, or raltegravir) and most nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors have no clinically important statin interactions; efavirenz induces CYP3A4 and lowers simvastatin and atorvastatin exposure.

Statins in heart failure

Statins prevent incident heart failure by preventing myocardial infarction, but they have not improved outcomes once heart failure is established. CORONA randomized 5,011 patients aged 60 years or older with ischemic systolic heart failure (New York Heart Association class II to IV) to rosuvastatin 10 mg or placebo. The primary composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke was not significantly reduced (HR 0.92), although hospitalizations for heart failure were fewer. GISSI-HF randomized 4,574 patients with chronic heart failure of any cause to rosuvastatin 10 mg or placebo; all-cause mortality was identical (HR 1.00) over a median of 3.9 years. Advanced heart failure carries a high rate of nonatherosclerotic death (pump failure and arrhythmia), which explains part of the neutral result.

The 2018 ACC/AHA cholesterol guideline concluded that in adults with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction attributable to ischemic heart disease, a reasonable life expectancy (3 to 5 years), and no prior statin, a moderate-intensity statin may be considered (Class 2b). Patients with heart failure and coronary disease who are already taking a statin continue it, because the ASCVD indication persists, and the decision is individualized in advanced heart failure with limited life expectancy. Statins are not used as treatment for nonischemic cardiomyopathy or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Management of the heart failure itself is covered on the heart failure with reduced ejection fraction page.

Statins after heart and kidney transplantation

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy, a diffuse, concentric, immune-mediated intimal proliferation, is the leading cause of late graft loss after heart transplantation. Statins are part of standard care in recipients regardless of cholesterol level. In a randomized trial of 97 heart transplant recipients, pravastatin started early after transplantation lowered LDL-C, reduced rejection with hemodynamic compromise (3 versus 14 patients), reduced angiographic vasculopathy, and improved 1-year survival (94% versus 78%). A simvastatin trial produced similar results, and the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines recommend statin therapy for adult heart transplant recipients. The effect on rejection and vasculopathy is larger than expected from LDL lowering and is attributed in part to immunomodulation.

Transplant immunosuppressants dictate the statin and dose. Cyclosporine inhibits CYP3A4, P-glycoprotein, and OATP1B1 and raises the exposure of every statin, rosuvastatin about sevenfold; simvastatin and pitavastatin are contraindicated with cyclosporine, and lovastatin and atorvastatin are avoided. Pravastatin (started at 10 mg, maximum 20 mg), rosuvastatin (maximum 5 mg), and fluvastatin are the statins with the most experience in cyclosporine-treated patients. Tacrolimus is a CYP3A4 substrate but a weaker inhibitor, and low-dose atorvastatin or simvastatin has been used with it, although pravastatin and rosuvastatin remain the usual choices. Everolimus and sirolimus are CYP3A4 substrates that raise lipids, and they increase the need for statin therapy. Low statin doses are the rule after transplantation, and the immunosuppressant level is checked after the statin is started because some statins alter calcineurin inhibitor exposure.

After kidney transplantation, the ALERT trial of fluvastatin in 2,102 cyclosporine-treated recipients did not significantly reduce its primary composite, but cardiac death or nonfatal myocardial infarction fell by about one-third. Statin therapy is standard after kidney transplantation, with the same interaction constraints.

Statins in older adults and discontinuation at the end of life

Adults older than 75 years have the highest absolute cardiovascular risk and therefore the largest potential absolute benefit, but also more competing causes of death, frailty, polypharmacy, and susceptibility to adverse effects. In secondary prevention, age is not a reason to withhold or de-escalate effective statin therapy; the CTT analysis of older people showed significant proportional reductions in every age group. In primary prevention, randomized evidence after age 75 is limited. PROSPER enrolled 5,804 adults aged 70 to 82 years with vascular disease or risk factors. Pravastatin 40 mg reduced the primary coronary and stroke composite by 15%, with the benefit evident mainly in those with prior vascular disease, and had no effect on cognition. The STAREE and PREVENTABLE trials are testing statins for primary prevention in older adults, including effects on disability-free survival and dementia.

The 2026 guideline weighs functional status, frailty, multimorbidity, and life expectancy in adults older than 75 years without ASCVD. With a life expectancy of at least 2.5 years, a moderate-intensity statin may be reasonable after discussion (Class 2b). When the decision is uncertain, coronary artery calcium scoring may be reasonable, and a score of 0 to 10 supports withholding a statin (Class 2b). Moderate intensity is the usual starting point in older adults because dose-dependent adverse effects rise with age, and interacting drugs are reviewed before any statin is chosen.

Discontinuation in limited life expectancy. Statins prevent events over years, so their value declines as life expectancy shortens, while pill burden and drug interactions remain. In a randomized trial of 381 patients with advanced, life-limiting illness and an estimated life expectancy of 1 month to 1 year, discontinuation of statin therapy did not significantly change the proportion who died within 60 days. Discontinuation was associated with a small improvement in quality of life and reduced medication costs. The 2026 guideline finds discontinuation reasonable when life expectancy is below 1 year (Class 2b). Deprescribing in older adults generally is discussed on the cardiovascular drug interactions and dosing page.

Statins in women, pregnancy, and lactation

Women derive the same proportional reduction in major vascular events per mmol/L of LDL-C lowering as men in the 2015 CTT analysis of 27 trials. Women with ASCVD are nonetheless less often prescribed high-intensity statins and less often reach LDL-C goals, a gap explained by prescribing and adherence, not by differences in benefit. Women report statin-associated muscle symptoms more often in observational studies. Sex-specific risk-enhancing factors in the 2026 guideline, including premature menopause, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, and preterm delivery, move some women into the range in which statins are recommended.

In 2021, the FDA asked manufacturers to remove the contraindication to statins in pregnancy from all statin labels, while retaining advice to discontinue them in most patients once pregnancy is recognized. The basis was the absence of a consistent teratogenic signal in human data and the recognition that a small group of women at very high risk may benefit from continuation. The 2026 guideline recommends stopping statins 1 to 2 months before planned conception or when pregnancy is recognized in women without severe familial hypercholesterolemia or ASCVD. It also finds that continuation may be reasonable after individualized discussion in women with familial hypercholesterolemia or established ASCVD, preferably with a hydrophilic statin such as pravastatin. Statins are avoided during breastfeeding. Bile acid sequestrants, which are not absorbed, and lipoprotein apheresis are the alternatives during pregnancy.

Perioperative statin therapy

Statin withdrawal around surgery is associated with more postoperative cardiovascular events in observational studies, and abrupt discontinuation after acute coronary syndrome has been associated with higher mortality. The 2024 AHA/ACC perioperative guideline recommends continuing statins in patients who take them and are scheduled for noncardiac surgery (Class 1). It also recommends perioperative initiation of a statin in statin-naive adults who meet standard criteria for statin therapy, with the intention of long-term use (Class 1). Statins are resumed promptly after surgery, by nasogastric tube if necessary, because no intravenous formulation exists.

Short-term statin loading to prevent perioperative events in statin-naive patients has not been proven. In the LOAD trial, 648 high-risk statin-naive patients undergoing noncardiac surgery received atorvastatin 80 mg within 18 hours before surgery and 40 mg daily for 7 days, or placebo. The 30-day composite of death, myocardial injury, and stroke was not significantly reduced (16.6% versus 18.7%; HR 0.87). In cardiac surgery, the STICS trial randomized 1,922 patients to rosuvastatin 20 mg or placebo for up to 8 days before and 5 days after surgery. Rosuvastatin did not reduce postoperative atrial fibrillation (21.1% versus 20.5%) or myocardial injury and increased acute kidney injury (24.7% versus 19.3%). Statins are given to cardiac surgery patients for their long-term ASCVD indication, not to prevent perioperative complications.

Statins in aortic stenosis and other nonatherosclerotic conditions

Calcific aortic stenosis shares risk factors and early histology with atherosclerosis, and lipoprotein(a) is causally associated with it, but statins do not slow established disease. In the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) trial, 1,873 patients with mild to moderate asymptomatic aortic stenosis received simvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe or placebo; aortic valve events were not reduced, although ischemic events were. SALTIRE and ASTRONOMER were also neutral for valve progression. Patients with aortic stenosis receive statins for their usual ASCVD indications; management of the valve is covered on the aortic stenosis page.

Randomized trials have not established a benefit of statins for preventing atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, or contrast-associated acute kidney injury, for treating sepsis, or for preventing cardiotoxicity in all patients receiving anthracyclines. The STOP-CA trial showed that atorvastatin 40 mg reduced the incidence of a significant decline in left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with lymphoma treated with anthracyclines, a finding limited to the population studied. The 2026 guideline recommends continuing statins during active cancer treatment unless an interaction exists or life expectancy is below 1 year.

Statin-associated muscle symptoms: spectrum and definitions

Statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS) range from aches without laboratory abnormality to rhabdomyolysis with acute kidney injury. Terms have been used inconsistently; the definitions below follow the 2022 National Lipid Association (NLA) statement, the 2018 ACC/AHA guideline, and the 2015 European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) consensus. Creatine kinase (CK) is expressed as a multiple of the upper limit of normal (ULN), and physical exertion, trauma, intramuscular injection, hypothyroidism, and ancestry (higher normal values in people of African ancestry) are accounted for when it is interpreted.

Spectrum of statin-associated muscle events, after the 2022 NLA statement, the 2018 ACC/AHA guideline, the 2015 EAS consensus, and US labeling. In the EAS consensus, muscle symptoms with CK between 4 and 10 times ULN lead to withdrawal of the statin in patients at low cardiovascular risk and to continued therapy with CK monitoring in patients at high risk; CK above 10 times ULN leads to withdrawal. US guidance reserves CK measurement for severe symptoms or weakness.

Statin intolerance. The NLA defines statin intolerance as one or more adverse effects associated with statin therapy that resolve or improve with dose reduction or discontinuation. It is classified as complete (no statin tolerated at any dose) or partial (some statin tolerated at some dose), and the diagnosis requires that at least two statins have been tried, at least one at the lowest approved daily dose. The definition excludes symptoms explained by drug interactions, untreated hypothyroidism, or other predisposing conditions. The 2026 ACC/AHA guideline uses the same concept: intolerance is partial when some exposure is tolerated but is insufficient to reach the goal, and complete when no clinically meaningful regimen can be maintained. Under these definitions, complete intolerance is uncommon, a conclusion also reached by the ACC expert consensus decision pathway on nonstatin therapy.

Incidence of muscle symptoms and the nocebo effect

In observational cohorts, roughly 10% or more of statin users report muscle symptoms, and muscle complaints are the most common reason given for stopping a statin. Blinded trials report almost the same rate with placebo. The CTT individual-participant analysis of 19 large double-blind trials of statin versus placebo (123,940 participants) found muscle pain or weakness in 27.1% of patients assigned a statin and 26.6% assigned placebo (rate ratio 1.03). The small excess was confined to the first year of treatment, when about 1 in 15 muscle complaints in statin-treated participants was attributable to the statin; after the first year there was no excess. The excess was somewhat larger with more intensive regimens.

Trials in patients who had already stopped a statin because of symptoms give the same answer. In SAMSON, 60 such patients each took atorvastatin 20 mg, placebo, and no tablet in randomized monthly blocks. Symptom intensity was similar with statin and placebo, and about 90% of the symptom burden reported with the statin was also present with placebo (the nocebo ratio). In StatinWISE, 200 patients who had stopped or were considering stopping a statin because of muscle symptoms completed randomized double-blind N-of-1 sequences of atorvastatin 20 mg and placebo. Muscle symptom scores did not differ, and most participants who completed the trial decided to restart a statin. In phase A of GAUSS-3, 491 patients with a history of intolerance to multiple statins underwent blinded crossover to atorvastatin 20 mg and placebo. Intolerable muscle symptoms occurred on atorvastatin but not on placebo in 42.6%, on placebo but not on atorvastatin in 26.5%, and on both or neither in the remainder. GAUSS-3 shows that a reproducible statin effect does exist in a subset of highly selected patients, alongside a large nocebo component.

Rhabdomyolysis is rare. In a US cohort of 252,460 patients treated with lipid-lowering drugs, the incidence of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis with atorvastatin, pravastatin, or simvastatin monotherapy was 0.44 per 10,000 person-years. It was about 12 times higher with cerivastatin, about 6 per 10,000 person-years when these statins were combined with a fibrate, and more than 1,000 per 10,000 person-years when cerivastatin was combined with gemfibrozil. In simvastatin labeling, myopathy occurred in about 0.03%, 0.08%, and 0.61% of patients taking 20, 40, and 80 mg daily, and in SEARCH, rhabdomyolysis occurred in about 0.4% of patients on simvastatin 80 mg and none on 20 mg.

Mechanisms of statin myopathy and its risk factors

The mechanisms of statin muscle injury are incompletely defined. Proposed contributors are depletion of coenzyme Q10 with impaired mitochondrial respiration, reduced prenylation of small GTP-binding proteins that regulate myocyte survival, altered sarcolemmal cholesterol content and calcium handling, and induction of the muscle atrophy gene atrogin-1. All are concentration dependent, which explains why the clinical risk factors are those that raise systemic exposure or lower muscle reserve.

Risk factors listed in US labeling and the AHA safety statement are age 65 years or older, female sex, low body mass, uncontrolled hypothyroidism, kidney impairment, high statin dose, interacting drugs (CYP3A4 inhibitors, OATP1B1 inhibitors, fibrates, niacin, colchicine), heavy alcohol use, strenuous exercise, Asian ancestry (for rosuvastatin and simvastatin), the SLCO1B1 reduced-function genotype, and pre-existing neuromuscular disease. Acute illness that predisposes to kidney failure (sepsis, shock, severe hypovolemia, major surgery, trauma, severe metabolic or electrolyte disorders, and uncontrolled seizures) is a labeled reason to withhold the statin temporarily.

Thyroid function. Hypothyroidism causes myopathy, raises CK on its own, and impairs statin clearance. Thyroid-stimulating hormone is measured in patients with muscle symptoms, and hypothyroidism is treated before a statin is judged intolerable.

Vitamin D. Low vitamin D levels are associated with muscle symptoms in observational studies, but randomized evidence does not support supplementation for this purpose. In a substudy of the VITAL trial, 2,083 participants who started a statin while randomized to vitamin D3 or placebo reported muscle symptoms at identical rates (31% in each group) and discontinued statins at similar rates, irrespective of baseline vitamin D level.

Coenzyme Q10. Statins lower circulating coenzyme Q10, but meta-analyses of small randomized trials have not shown that supplementation reduces muscle symptoms. The 2018 ACC/AHA guideline judged routine coenzyme Q10 supplementation not beneficial for patients with SAMS (Class 3: No Benefit).

Pharmacogenomics: SLCO1B1, ABCG2, and CYP2C9

The SLCO1B1 c.521T>C variant (rs4149056), present in the SLCO1B1 *5 and *15 alleles, reduces OATP1B1 transport, impairs hepatic uptake, and raises systemic statin concentrations. A genome-wide study within SEARCH identified it as the dominant genetic determinant of myopathy with simvastatin 80 mg: the odds ratio was about 4.5 per C allele and about 17 in CC homozygotes, and the variant accounted for more than 60% of myopathy cases. The effect is largest with simvastatin and smaller with atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, pitavastatin, and pravastatin. ABCG2 reduced-function variants (such as rs2231142, common in East Asian populations) raise rosuvastatin exposure, and CYP2C9 poor-metabolizer genotypes raise fluvastatin exposure.

The 2022 Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline translates these genotypes into prescribing recommendations when genotype is already known. Routine preemptive genotyping is not recommended by the ACC/AHA guidelines.

Dosing by SLCO1B1 phenotype from the 2022 CPIC guideline (Table 2). Normal and increased function: usual starting dose for every statin. CPIC also recommends rosuvastatin 20 mg or less for ABCG2 poor function and fluvastatin 40 mg or less (intermediate metabolizers) or 20 mg or less (poor metabolizers) by CYP2C9 genotype.

Evaluation of muscle symptoms and rechallenge

The aim of evaluation is to keep the patient on the most effective tolerated LDL-lowering regimen, because statin discontinuation after an event is associated with recurrent events and death. The 2026 guideline directs a structured assessment and rechallenge of patients with statin-attributed symptoms, keeps any tolerated statin dose, and adds nonstatin therapy to reach the goal; symptoms during statin therapy do not by themselves justify permanent withdrawal of the class. The ACC Statin Intolerance tool and the Statin-Associated Muscle Symptom Clinical Index (SAMS-CI) structure this evaluation. The SAMS-CI scores four features (location and pattern of symptoms, time to onset after starting, time to improvement after withdrawal, and time to recurrence after rechallenge) and classifies attribution as probable, possible, or unlikely.

Evaluation and management of statin-associated muscle symptoms, after the 2026 ACC/AHA guideline, the 2022 NLA statement, and the 2022 ACC expert consensus decision pathway. Rechallenge is not attempted after immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy.

Nondaily dosing. Rosuvastatin and atorvastatin, with effective half-lives near a day or longer, retain much of their LDL-lowering effect when taken on alternate days or twice weekly. Small studies show that most patients previously intolerant of daily dosing tolerate these schedules. Outcome trials of nondaily dosing do not exist, and the regimen is used to keep some statin exposure, usually combined with ezetimibe or another nonstatin. Short-half-life statins lose effect on nondaily schedules.

Communication. The prior expectation of harm shapes symptom reporting. Explaining the SAMSON and StatinWISE results, presenting rechallenge as a test, and showing the patient the measured LDL-C reduction are associated with restoration of statin therapy in most patients. In high-risk patients, such as after recent acute coronary syndrome, nonstatin therapy is started while the evaluation and rechallenge proceed, so that LDL-C is not left untreated. Nonstatin agents are covered in detail on the dyslipidemia and LDL lowering page.

Immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy and anti-HMGCR antibodies

Statin-associated immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy is an autoimmune disease distinct from toxic statin myopathy. Statin exposure is thought to increase expression of HMG-CoA reductase in regenerating muscle and break tolerance in genetically susceptible people, with a strong association with the HLA-DRB1*11:01 allele. It affects about 2 or 3 of every 100,000 patients treated with statins. Patients present with subacute, progressive, symmetric proximal weakness, sometimes with dysphagia, and CK is typically in the thousands. The defining feature is persistence or progression of weakness and CK elevation after the statin is stopped, unlike toxic myopathy, which resolves.

Diagnosis rests on anti-HMG-CoA reductase (anti-HMGCR) antibodies, which are highly specific for this disease in statin-exposed adults, supported by electromyography, magnetic resonance imaging showing muscle edema, and muscle biopsy showing necrotic and regenerating fibers with sparse inflammation. Treatment is immunosuppression (glucocorticoids with methotrexate, azathioprine, or mycophenolate, and intravenous immunoglobulin, which has been effective as monotherapy in some patients), usually under neuromuscular or rheumatology care. US labeling for every statin includes this condition and reports recurrence when the same or a different statin was given. Statins are permanently avoided, and LDL lowering continues with nonstatin therapy, of which PCSK9-directed therapy and ezetimibe have been used without recurrence.

New-onset diabetes

Statins modestly raise blood glucose and the risk of a diabetes diagnosis, an effect attributed to reduced insulin secretion and sensitivity linked to HMG-CoA reductase inhibition itself. Genetic variants in HMGCR that mimic statin effects are also associated with higher body weight and diabetes risk. In the 2010 meta-analysis of 13 statin trials, statin therapy increased incident diabetes by 9% (odds ratio 1.09), about one additional case for every 255 patients treated for 4 years. Over the same 4 years, about 5.4 vascular events per 255 treated were avoided. Intensive regimens raised the risk more than moderate ones.

The 2024 CTT analysis of 19 placebo-controlled trials (123,940 participants) and 4 trials of more versus less intensive therapy quantified the effect by intensity. Low- or moderate-intensity statins increased new diagnoses of diabetes by 10% and high-intensity statins by 36% (rate ratio 1.36), and mean glycated hemoglobin rose by 0.06 to 0.08 percentage points. About 62% of new diagnoses occurred in participants whose baseline glycemia was already in the top quarter, so the effect is mainly an earlier diagnosis in people already approaching the diagnostic threshold. In people with diabetes, statins slightly increased the risk of worsening glycemia. LODESTAR and REPRIEVE showed the same signal with rosuvastatin and pitavastatin.

The cardiovascular benefit of statins exceeds the diabetes risk in every group in which they are indicated, including people with prediabetes, in whom the absolute ASCVD risk is higher. Labeling for every statin includes increases in glycated hemoglobin and fasting glucose. Management consists of glucose monitoring in patients at risk, emphasis on weight control and physical activity, and continuation of the statin.

Liver enzymes and hepatotoxicity

Asymptomatic increases in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) above 3 times ULN occur in a small percentage of patients and are dose related. Rates were 1.1% with rosuvastatin versus 0.5% with placebo in pooled rosuvastatin trials, and persistent elevations occurred in 1.2% with atorvastatin 80 mg versus 0.2% with 10 mg in TNT. Most appear early, are transient, and resolve on continued therapy or after brief interruption; they reflect hepatocyte adaptation, not injury. Clinically apparent drug-induced liver injury is rare, and acute liver failure attributable to statins is exceptional.

In 2012, the FDA removed the recommendation for routine periodic liver enzyme monitoring from statin labeling, because routine monitoring did not detect or prevent serious liver injury. Current labeling and the ACC/AHA guidelines call for a baseline ALT before therapy and repeat testing when symptoms of liver injury appear (fatigue, anorexia, right upper quadrant discomfort, dark urine, or jaundice). An ALT above 3 times ULN on repeat testing leads to a dose reduction or a change of statin and a search for other causes, such as steatotic liver disease, alcohol, viral hepatitis, and other drugs. Serious liver injury with hyperbilirubinemia or jaundice leads to discontinuation of the statin. Mild elevations from steatotic liver disease are not a reason to withhold statins, as described in the section on liver disease.

Hemorrhagic stroke, cognition, cancer, cataract, and other adverse-effect claims

Hemorrhagic stroke. Statins reduce ischemic stroke substantially, with a small and uncertain increase in hemorrhagic stroke. In SPARCL, 4,731 patients with recent stroke or transient ischemic attack and no coronary disease received atorvastatin 80 mg or placebo; total stroke fell (11.2% versus 13.1%; HR 0.84), but hemorrhagic stroke was more frequent (2.3% versus 1.4%), particularly in patients whose entry stroke was hemorrhagic or lacunar. Atorvastatin labeling advises weighing the risks of 80 mg in patients with recent hemorrhagic stroke. The CTT analyses show a small excess of hemorrhagic stroke that is far outweighed by the reduction in ischemic stroke, and statin therapy is standard after ischemic stroke of atherosclerotic origin.

Cognition. In 2012, the FDA added postmarketing reports of memory loss and confusion to statin labeling. These reports are generally nonserious and reversible, and randomized trials designed to measure cognitive function (including HPS and PROSPER) found no effect of statins on cognitive decline or dementia. Very low LDL-C achieved with PCSK9 inhibitors also did not affect cognition in a dedicated substudy of FOURIER.

Cancer. The CTT meta-analysis found no effect of statins on cancer incidence or cancer mortality over 5 years of treatment or during posttrial follow-up. An excess of cancer in PROSPER was not confirmed in pooled data.

Cataract. Observational studies have reported conflicting associations. Cataract surgery was slightly more frequent with rosuvastatin in HOPE-3 and in LODESTAR (compared with atorvastatin), a signal that has not been consistent across trials.

Other effects. Gastrointestinal symptoms, headache, rash, and sleep disturbance occur at rates similar to placebo in blinded trials. Proteinuria and microscopic hematuria have been reported with rosuvastatin 40 mg, which is noted in its labeling. Tendon rupture, peripheral neuropathy, erectile dysfunction, interstitial lung disease, and depression have been attributed to statins in case reports and observational studies without confirmation in randomized trials. Hypersensitivity reactions, including angioedema, are rare.

FDA labeling changes for statins

Major US regulatory actions affecting statin use. Immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy now appears in the warnings of every statin label. Current interaction-specific dose limits are listed in the interaction table and in each statin's prescribing information.

Mechanisms of statin drug interactions

Most serious statin toxicity occurs when a second drug raises statin exposure. The 2016 AHA scientific statement on statin interactions organizes them by mechanism, and the mechanism predicts which statins are affected.

CYP3A4 inhibition. Strong inhibitors (clarithromycin, itraconazole, ketoconazole, posaconazole, voriconazole, ritonavir, cobicistat, and nefazodone) raise simvastatin and lovastatin exposure 10-fold or more, because these statins undergo extensive intestinal and hepatic first-pass CYP3A4 metabolism; both are contraindicated with strong inhibitors. Atorvastatin exposure rises less (several-fold with clarithromycin or itraconazole), so atorvastatin is dose-limited. Moderate inhibitors (verapamil, diltiazem, dronedarone, erythromycin, and fluconazole) and weak inhibitors (amiodarone, amlodipine, ranolazine, ticagrelor) produce smaller increases that matter mainly with simvastatin and lovastatin. Rosuvastatin, pravastatin, pitavastatin, and fluvastatin are not meaningfully affected by CYP3A4 inhibition.

OATP1B1 and BCRP inhibition. Inhibitors of hepatic uptake (cyclosporine, gemfibrozil, some HIV protease inhibitors, several hepatitis C direct-acting antivirals, darolutamide, and rifampin given acutely) raise the exposure of every statin, including the hydrophilic ones that escape CYP3A4 interactions. Cyclosporine inhibits CYP3A4, OATP1B1, and P-glycoprotein together and produces the largest increases. Inhibitors of BCRP, such as febuxostat, teriflunomide, and several tyrosine kinase inhibitors, raise rosuvastatin exposure in particular.

Glucuronidation. Gemfibrozil also inhibits statin glucuronidation (and CYP2C8), which is why it interacts with every statin and why the cerivastatin–gemfibrozil combination caused fatal rhabdomyolysis. Fenofibrate does not share this effect.

CYP2C9. Fluconazole and other CYP2C9 inhibitors raise fluvastatin exposure.

Pharmacodynamic interactions. Fibrates, niacin at lipid-modifying doses (1 g daily or more), colchicine, and daptomycin cause myopathy on their own and add to statin risk without a pharmacokinetic interaction.

Induction. Rifampin, carbamazepine, phenytoin, efavirenz, and St. John's wort induce CYP3A4 and lower the exposure and LDL-lowering effect of CYP3A4-metabolized statins. Rifampin given with atorvastatin acutely raises its concentration through OATP1B1 inhibition, but delayed administration markedly lowers it, so atorvastatin labeling advises simultaneous dosing.

Statin drug interactions and dose limits

Daily dose limits from current US prescribing information for each statin, the 2016 AHA statement, and FDA guidance for nirmatrelvir-ritonavir. Fluvastatin labeling restricts its use with cyclosporine, fluconazole, and gemfibrozil. Simvastatin is also contraindicated with danazol, and atorvastatin is limited to 20 mg with letermovir. Dashes indicate no labeled restriction specific to that statin. The interaction profile of every cardiovascular drug class is covered on the cardiovascular drug interactions and dosing page.

Nirmatrelvir-ritonavir for COVID-19. Given for 5 days, it inhibits CYP3A4 for several days after the last dose while the enzyme is resynthesized. FDA guidance directs that lovastatin and simvastatin be stopped at least 12 hours before the course and resumed 5 days after its completion. Atorvastatin does not need to be held before or after the course, and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir labeling advises considering its temporary discontinuation during treatment; rosuvastatin carries no labeled restriction. Stopping a statin for 10 days carries negligible cardiovascular risk compared with rhabdomyolysis.

Cardiovascular drugs. Several common cardiovascular drugs are weak to moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors. Amlodipine raises simvastatin exposure modestly and limits simvastatin to 20 mg; verapamil, diltiazem, and dronedarone limit it to 10 mg; amiodarone limits it to 20 mg, an effect that persists for months after amiodarone is stopped because of its long half-life. Ranolazine and ticagrelor raise simvastatin and lovastatin exposure. In each case, the simplest solution is a switch to atorvastatin or rosuvastatin, both of which also deliver high-intensity therapy. Colchicine for chronic coronary disease or pericarditis adds a pharmacodynamic myopathy risk, particularly when kidney function is reduced; the combination is common and acceptable at the 0.5 mg daily dose used for cardiovascular prevention, with attention to muscle symptoms. Colchicine therapy is covered on the colchicine and anti-inflammatory therapy page.

Warfarin and digoxin. Rosuvastatin, simvastatin, lovastatin, and fluvastatin can raise the international normalized ratio (INR) in patients taking warfarin; in simvastatin studies, the INR rose from 2.6 to 3.4 in patients with hyperlipidemia. The INR is measured before the statin is started and after initiation or any dose change. Atorvastatin and pravastatin have little effect on the INR. Atorvastatin and simvastatin modestly raise digoxin concentrations through P-glycoprotein inhibition, and digoxin is monitored when they are started. Statins do not interact meaningfully with direct oral anticoagulants, although atorvastatin and simvastatin are weak P-glycoprotein inhibitors.

Other drugs. Atorvastatin raises exposure to norethindrone and ethinyl estradiol, which is relevant to the choice of oral contraceptive. Daptomycin causes myopathy, and simvastatin labeling suggests suspending the statin during daptomycin therapy. Bile acid sequestrants bind statins in the gut; pravastatin is taken at least 1 hour before or 4 hours after a sequestrant. Red yeast rice contains unregulated amounts of monacolin K, which is chemically identical to lovastatin, and is not combined with a prescription statin.

Laboratory monitoring during statin therapy

Laboratory monitoring according to the 2026 and 2018 ACC/AHA guidelines and current US labeling.

Adherence, persistence, cost, and generic availability

The benefit of statins is realized only with sustained use, and persistence falls substantially within the first year. Discontinuation follows perceived side effects, misinformation about harms, low perceived benefit, pill burden, and cost; in a large US survey of current and former statin users, most former users cited side effects as the main reason for stopping. Statin discontinuation after acute coronary syndrome and in primary prevention is associated with more cardiovascular events.

Atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, and fluvastatin are available as inexpensive generics, which removes cost as a barrier for most patients. Measures associated with better adherence include early follow-up with the measured LDL-C reduction, once-daily fixed-dose combinations, pharmacist and nurse follow-up, reminder systems, and clear explanation of the expected benefit and of the nocebo data. The measured LDL-C response at 4 to 12 weeks is the most direct objective check of adherence.

Common errors in statin prescribing

• Doubling a statin dose to close a gap of more than about 6% to the LDL-C goal: the dose-response curve is shallow, and ezetimibe or PCSK9-directed therapy closes larger gaps.
• Starting a moderate-intensity statin after an acute coronary syndrome or in clinical ASCVD when a high-intensity statin is tolerated.
• Prescribing simvastatin 80 mg to a new patient, or continuing simvastatin above 20 mg with amiodarone, amlodipine, or ranolazine or above 10 mg with verapamil, diltiazem, or dronedarone.
• Combining simvastatin or lovastatin with clarithromycin, an azole antifungal, a boosted HIV protease inhibitor, or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir.
• Combining any statin with gemfibrozil: fenofibrate is the fibrate used with statins.
• Labeling a patient statin-intolerant after one statin, without a washout, a rechallenge, or a second statin at the lowest dose.
• Stopping a statin permanently for asymptomatic CK or aminotransferase elevations below 3 to 4 times ULN.
• Rechallenging a patient with anti-HMGCR immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy, whose weakness persists after withdrawal.
• Prescribing coenzyme Q10 or vitamin D to prevent statin muscle symptoms in place of a structured rechallenge.
• Withholding a statin from a patient with steatotic liver disease because of mild aminotransferase elevation.
• Starting rosuvastatin at 20 to 40 mg in a patient of Asian ancestry or with creatinine clearance below 30 mL/min not on dialysis.
• Stopping a statin because of new prediabetes or diabetes: the cardiovascular benefit exceeds the diabetes risk.
• Starting a statin for the first time in a patient on maintenance dialysis without another indication (continuation of an existing statin is reasonable).
• Continuing statin therapy unchanged in a patient with a life expectancy of weeks to months, where discontinuation improves quality of life without measurable harm.

References

1. Blumenthal RS, Morris PB, Gaudino M, et al. 2026 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA guideline on the management of dyslipidemia: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2026;87:2624–2757. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2025.11.016 (also Circulation. 2026;153:e1154–e1276; correction: Circulation. 2026;153(25), doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001457)
2. Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, et al. 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA guideline on the management of blood cholesterol. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:e285–e350. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.003
3. Lloyd-Jones DM, Morris PB, Ballantyne CM, et al. 2022 ACC expert consensus decision pathway on the role of nonstatin therapies for LDL-cholesterol lowering in the management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;80:1366–1418. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2022.07.006
4. Wiggins BS, Saseen JJ, Page RL 2nd, et al. Recommendations for management of clinically significant drug-drug interactions with statins and select agents used in patients with cardiovascular disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2016;134:e468–e495. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000456
5. Cheeley MK, Saseen JJ, Agarwala A, et al. NLA scientific statement on statin intolerance: a new definition and key considerations for ASCVD risk reduction in the statin intolerant patient. J Clin Lipidol. 2022;16:361–375. doi:10.1016/j.jacl.2022.05.068
6. Newman CB, Preiss D, Tobert JA, et al. Statin safety and associated adverse events: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2019;39:e38–e81. doi:10.1161/ATV.0000000000000073
7. Stroes ES, Thompson PD, Corsini A, et al. Statin-associated muscle symptoms: impact on statin therapy. European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel statement on assessment, aetiology and management. Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1012–1022. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv043
8. Cooper-DeHoff RM, Niemi M, Ramsey LB, et al. The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guideline for SLCO1B1, ABCG2, and CYP2C9 genotypes and statin-associated musculoskeletal symptoms. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2022;111:1007–1021. doi:10.1002/cpt.2557
9. Law MR, Wald NJ, Rudnicka AR. Quantifying effect of statins on low density lipoprotein cholesterol, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2003;326:1423–1427. doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1423
10. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration. Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials. Lancet. 2010;376:1670–1681. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61350-5
11. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration. Efficacy and safety of statin therapy in older people: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from 28 randomised controlled trials. Lancet. 2019;393:407–415. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31942-1
12. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration. Effect of statin therapy on muscle symptoms: an individual participant data meta-analysis of large-scale, randomised, double-blind trials. Lancet. 2022;400:832–845. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01545-8
13. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' Collaboration. Effects of statin therapy on diagnoses of new-onset diabetes and worsening glycaemia in large-scale randomised blinded statin trials: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2024;12:306–319. doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00040-8
14. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group. Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet. 1994;344:1383–1389.
15. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360:7–22. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)09327-3
16. Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, et al. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia (WOSCOPS randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 1995;333:1301–1307. doi:10.1056/NEJM199511163332001
17. Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FAH, et al. Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and women with elevated C-reactive protein (JUPITER randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2008;359:2195–2207. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0807646
18. Yusuf S, Bosch J, Dagenais G, et al. Cholesterol lowering in intermediate-risk persons without cardiovascular disease (HOPE-3 randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2016;374:2021–2031. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1600176
19. Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes (PROVE IT–TIMI 22 randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2004;350:1495–1504. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa040583
20. LaRosa JC, Grundy SM, Waters DD, et al. Intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin in patients with stable coronary disease (TNT randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2005;352:1425–1435. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa050461
21. Study of the Effectiveness of Additional Reductions in Cholesterol and Homocysteine (SEARCH) Collaborative Group. Intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol with 80 mg versus 20 mg simvastatin daily in 12,064 survivors of myocardial infarction: a double-blind randomised trial. Lancet. 2010;376:1658–1669. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60310-8
22. Cannon CP, Blazing MA, Giugliano RP, et al. Ezetimibe added to statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes (IMPROVE-IT randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2387–2397. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1410489
23. Lee YJ, Hong SJ, Kang WC, et al. Rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin treatment in adults with coronary artery disease: secondary analysis of the randomised LODESTAR trial. BMJ. 2023;383:e075837. doi:10.1136/bmj-2023-075837
24. Nicholls SJ, Ballantyne CM, Barter PJ, et al. Effect of two intensive statin regimens on progression of coronary disease (SATURN randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2011;365:2078–2087. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1110874
25. Kjekshus J, Apetrei E, Barrios V, et al. Rosuvastatin in older patients with systolic heart failure (CORONA randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2007;357:2248–2261. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0706201
26. GISSI-HF Investigators. Effect of rosuvastatin in patients with chronic heart failure (the GISSI-HF trial): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2008;372:1231–1239. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61240-4
27. Baigent C, Landray MJ, Reith C, et al. The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with simvastatin plus ezetimibe in patients with chronic kidney disease (Study of Heart and Renal Protection): a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;377:2181–2192. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60739-3
28. Wanner C, Krane V, März W, et al. Atorvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing hemodialysis (4D randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2005;353:238–248. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa043545
29. Grinspoon SK, Fitch KV, Zanni MV, et al. Pitavastatin to prevent cardiovascular disease in HIV infection (REPRIEVE randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2023;389:687–699. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2304146
30. Kobashigawa JA, Katznelson S, Laks H, et al. Effect of pravastatin on outcomes after cardiac transplantation (randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 1995;333:621–627. doi:10.1056/NEJM199509073331003
31. Wood FA, Howard JP, Finegold JA, et al. N-of-1 trial of a statin, placebo, or no treatment to assess side effects (SAMSON randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2020;383:2182–2184. doi:10.1056/NEJMc2031173
32. Herrett E, Williamson E, Brack K, et al. Statin treatment and muscle symptoms: series of randomised, placebo controlled n-of-1 trials (StatinWISE). BMJ. 2021;372:n135. doi:10.1136/bmj.n135
33. Nissen SE, Stroes E, Dent-Acosta RE, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of evolocumab vs ezetimibe in patients with muscle-related statin intolerance (GAUSS-3 randomized trial). JAMA. 2016;315:1580–1590. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.3608
34. SEARCH Collaborative Group; Link E, Parish S, Armitage J, et al. SLCO1B1 variants and statin-induced myopathy: a genomewide study. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:789–799. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0801936
35. Graham DJ, Staffa JA, Shatin D, et al. Incidence of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis in patients treated with lipid-lowering drugs. JAMA. 2004;292:2585–2590. doi:10.1001/jama.292.21.2585
36. Mammen AL. Statin-associated autoimmune myopathy. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:664–669. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1515161
37. Sattar N, Preiss D, Murray HM, et al. Statins and risk of incident diabetes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomised statin trials. Lancet. 2010;375:735–742. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61965-6
38. Amarenco P, Bogousslavsky J, Callahan A 3rd, et al. High-dose atorvastatin after stroke or transient ischemic attack (SPARCL randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2006;355:549–559. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa061894
39. Hlatky MA, Gonzalez PE, Manson JE, et al. Statin-associated muscle symptoms among new statin users randomly assigned to vitamin D or placebo (VITAL randomized trial substudy). JAMA Cardiol. 2023;8:74–80. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2022.4250
40. Kutner JS, Blatchford PJ, Taylor DH Jr, et al. Safety and benefit of discontinuing statin therapy in the setting of advanced, life-limiting illness: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175:691–700. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.0289
41. Thompson A, Fleischmann KE, Smilowitz NR, et al. 2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM guideline for perioperative cardiovascular management for noncardiac surgery: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2024;150:e351–e442. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001285
42. Berwanger O, Le Manach Y, Suzumura EA, et al. Atorvastatin for high-risk statin-naïve patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: the Lowering the Risk of Operative Complications Using Atorvastatin Loading Dose (LOAD) randomized trial. Am Heart J. 2017;184:88–96. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2016.11.001
43. Zheng Z, Jayaram R, Jiang L, et al. Perioperative rosuvastatin in cardiac surgery (STICS randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1744–1753. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1507750
44. Rao SV, O’Donoghue ML, Ruel M, et al. 2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI guideline for the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2025;151:e771–e862. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001309
45. Yusuf S, Joseph P, Dans A, et al. Polypill with or without aspirin in persons without cardiovascular disease (TIPS-3 randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2021;384:216–228. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2028220
46. Taguchi I, Iimuro S, Iwata H, et al. High-dose versus low-dose pitavastatin in Japanese patients with stable coronary artery disease (REAL-CAD): a randomized superiority trial. Circulation. 2018;137:1997–2009. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.032615
47. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration. Efficacy and safety of LDL-lowering therapy among men and women: meta-analysis of individual data from 174,000 participants in 27 randomised trials. Lancet. 2015;385:1397–1405. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61368-4
48. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaborators. The effects of lowering LDL cholesterol with statin therapy in people at low risk of vascular disease: meta-analysis of individual data from 27 randomised trials. Lancet. 2012;380:581–590. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60367-5
49. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaborators. Efficacy of cholesterol-lowering therapy in 18,686 people with diabetes in 14 randomised trials of statins: a meta-analysis. Lancet. 2008;371:117–125. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60104-X
50. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration. Lack of effect of lowering LDL cholesterol on cancer: meta-analysis of individual data from 175,000 people in 27 randomised trials of statin therapy. PLoS One. 2012;7:e29849. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029849
51. Jones PH, Davidson MH, Stein EA, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR trial). Am J Cardiol. 2003;92:152–160. doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(03)00530-7
52. Sacks FM, Pfeffer MA, Moye LA, et al. The effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels (CARE randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 1996;335:1001–1009. doi:10.1056/NEJM199610033351401
53. Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) Study Group. Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1349–1357. doi:10.1056/NEJM199811053391902
54. Shepherd J, Blauw GJ, Murphy MB, et al. Pravastatin in elderly individuals at risk of vascular disease (PROSPER): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360:1623–1630. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11600-X
55. Fellström BC, Jardine AG, Schmieder RE, et al. Rosuvastatin and cardiovascular events in patients undergoing hemodialysis (AURORA randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1395–1407. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0810177
56. Castellano JM, Pocock SJ, Bhatt DL, et al. Polypill strategy in secondary cardiovascular prevention (SECURE randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2022;387:967–977. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2208275
57. Berwanger O, Santucci EV, de Barros e Silva PGM, et al. Effect of loading dose of atorvastatin prior to planned percutaneous coronary intervention on major adverse cardiovascular events in acute coronary syndrome: the SECURE-PCI randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;319:1331–1340. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.2444
58. Rossebø AB, Pedersen TR, Boman K, et al. Intensive lipid lowering with simvastatin and ezetimibe in aortic stenosis (SEAS randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1343–1356. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0804602
59. Nissen SE, Lincoff AM, Brennan D, et al. Bempedoic acid and cardiovascular outcomes in statin-intolerant patients (CLEAR Outcomes randomized trial). N Engl J Med. 2023;388:1353–1364. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2215024
60. Schwartz GG, Olsson AG, Ezekowitz MD, et al. Effects of atorvastatin on early recurrent ischemic events in acute coronary syndromes: the MIRACL study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2001;285:1711–1718. doi:10.1001/jama.285.13.1711
61. de Lemos JA, Blazing MA, Wiviott SD, et al. Early intensive vs a delayed conservative simvastatin strategy in patients with acute coronary syndromes: phase Z of the A to Z trial. JAMA. 2004;292:1307–1316. doi:10.1001/jama.292.11.1307
62. Pedersen TR, Faergeman O, Kastelein JJP, et al. High-dose atorvastatin vs usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;294:2437–2445. doi:10.1001/jama.294.19.2437
63. Downs JR, Clearfield M, Weis S, et al. Primary prevention of acute coronary events with lovastatin in men and women with average cholesterol levels: results of AFCAPS/TexCAPS. JAMA. 1998;279:1615–1622. doi:10.1001/jama.279.20.1615
64. Sever PS, Dahlöf B, Poulter NR, et al. Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hypertensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial–Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2003;361:1149–1158. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12948-0
65. Holdaas H, Fellström B, Jardine AG, et al. Effect of fluvastatin on cardiac outcomes in renal transplant recipients: a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial (ALERT). Lancet. 2003;361:2024–2031. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13638-0
66. Cowell SJ, Newby DE, Prescott RJ, et al. A randomized trial of intensive lipid-lowering therapy in calcific aortic stenosis (SALTIRE). N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2389–2397. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa043876
67. Chan KL, Teo K, Dumesnil JG, et al. Effect of lipid lowering with rosuvastatin on progression of aortic stenosis (ASTRONOMER randomized trial). Circulation. 2010;121:306–314. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.900027
68. Neilan TG, Quinaglia T, Onoue T, et al. Atorvastatin for anthracycline-associated cardiac dysfunction: the STOP-CA randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2023;330:528–536. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.11887
69. Giugliano RP, Mach F, Zavitz K, et al. Cognitive function in a randomized trial of evolocumab (EBBINGHAUS). N Engl J Med. 2017;377:633–643. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1701131
70. Rosenson RS, Miller K, Bayliss M, et al. The Statin-Associated Muscle Symptom Clinical Index (SAMS-CI): revision for clinical use, content validation, and inter-rater reliability. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2017;31:179–186. doi:10.1007/s10557-017-6723-4
71. Khan SS, Matsushita K, Sang Y, et al. Development and validation of the American Heart Association's PREVENT equations. Circulation. 2024;149:430–449. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.067626
72. Tonelli M, Wanner C; Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes Lipid Guideline Development Work Group Members. Lipid management in chronic kidney disease: synopsis of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes 2013 clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:182–189. doi:10.7326/M13-2453
73. Velleca A, Shullo MA, Dhital K, et al. The International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) guidelines for the care of heart transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2023;42:e1–e141. doi:10.1016/j.healun.2022.10.015
74. Wenke K, Meiser B, Thiery J, et al. Simvastatin reduces graft vessel disease and mortality after heart transplantation (randomized trial). Circulation. 1997;96:1398–1402. doi:10.1161/01.CIR.96.5.1398