Question explored with the scientific record
Conversation so far
- 1 Is a statin like Crestor worth the risk
- 2 What’s my absolute risk reduction with rosuvastatin, by age and LDL?
Answered on this page ↓
What’s my absolute risk reduction with rosuvastatin, by age and LDL?
The short version: the retrieved evidence does not give you absolute risk reduction numbers stratified by age and baseline LDL for rosuvastatin. The trials report relative risk reductions and composite endpoints, not the per-age, per-LDL table you are asking for.
The JUPITER trial, the main rosuvastatin primary-prevention study, enrolled people with LDL below 130 mg/dL and elevated CRP, then reported a hazard ratio of 0.55 for whites and 0.63 for nonwhites on the composite endpoint [3]. It did not publish absolute risk reduction by age band or by starting LDL level. The HOPE-3 trial, testing rosuvastatin 10 mg in intermediate-risk adults, found no difference in all-cause mortality over 5.6 years [1]. A combined analysis of JUPITER and HOPE-3 reported that rosuvastatin cut the composite cardiovascular risk by 49% in people aged 65–70 and by 26% in those over 70 [2]. That is a relative number, not an absolute one, and it does not tell you how much the benefit changes as LDL rises or falls.
The meta-analysis of 21 statin trials found a 0.8% absolute reduction in all-cause mortality across all statins and all ages [1]. That is the closest thing to a plain number you get from this retrieval, but it is not rosuvastatin-specific and not broken down by age or LDL.
| What was asked | What the evidence provides |
|---|---|
| Absolute risk reduction by age and LDL | Not reported in any retrieved study |
| Relative risk reduction by age (65–70 vs >70) | 49% vs 26% for composite CVD endpoint [2] |
| All-cause mortality reduction (all statins, all ages) | 0.8% absolute [1] |
My call: the data to answer your question precisely does not appear in these records. The trials were designed to report relative risk reductions in composite endpoints, not the per-age, per-LDL absolute numbers a person needs to weigh their own odds. Confidence: low, because the retrieval simply lacks the stratified absolute figures.
Sources used 3
-
Statin Use and the Risk of All-cause Mortality
Statins reduced all-cause mortality in some trials, but a meta-analysis found only a 0.8% absolute reduction, leaving the effect uncertain and prompting calls for trials with all-cause mortality as the primary endpoint.
DOI: 10.3904/kjm.2023.98.1.4 -
Should statin therapy be used in medication of elderly patients?
The author concludes that statin therapy is useful in elderly patients, with mandatory use in secondary prevention and lower, individually adjusted doses in primary prevention, while excluding patients with terminal illness, frailty, or dialysis.
DOI: 10.5937/galmed2202065d -
Race, ethnicity, and the efficacy of rosuvastatin in primary prevention: The Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention: An Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER) trial
A multinational, randomized, double-blind trial analysis showing rosuvastatin 20 mg reduces first cardiovascular events in primary prevention similarly among whites and nonwhites (blacks, Hispanics) with LDL-C <130 mg/dL and hsCRP ≥2 mg/L, with some differences in biomarker resp…
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.03.032