prev next front |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22 |23 |24 |25 |26 |27 |28 |29 |30 |31 |32 |review
Perhaps even more intriguing, the magnitude of efficacy of statin therapy in the CARE trial was directly related to the underlying level of inflammation present. When patients in the CARE study were stratified by whether they had a heightened inflammatory response or a lower inflammatory response, and then restratified according to placebo or pravastatin allocation, the greatest effect for pravastatin was evident among those who had evidence of inflammation. In fact, in these data, pravastatin appeared to greatly modify or attenuate the inflammatory response. Even in the absence of inflammation, pravastatin remained a highly effective clinical agent, indicating that in secondary prevention, statin therapy should be given regardless of inflammatory response. 

Ridker PM, Rifai N, Pfeffer MA, Sacks FM, Moye LA, Goldman S, Flaker GC, Braunwald E, for the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) Investigators. Inflammation, pravastatin, and the risk of coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. Circulation 1998;98:839-844.
Web site