Related trials
IMPROVE-IT, 2014 - ezetimibe vs control
AIM-HIGH, 2011 - niacin vs placebo (on top statin)
SEARCH, 2010 - simvastatin high dose vs simvastatin
ACCORD lipid, 2010 - fenofibrate vs placebo (on top simvastatine)
SHARP, 2010 - ezetimibe+simvastatin vs placebo
ARBITER-HALTS 6, 2010 - ezetimibe vs niacin
ARBITER 2, 2009 - niacin vs placebo (on top statin)
Oxford Niaspan Study, 2009 - niacin vs placebo (on top statin)
Emmerich, 2009 - etofibrate vs placebo
ARBITER 6-HALTS (niacin vs ezetimibe), 2009 - niacin vs ezetimibe
SANDS, 2008 - aggressive treatment vs standard teatment
Tuttle, 2008 - low fat diet vs mediterranean-style diet
GISSI-HF rosuvastatine, 2008 - rosuvastatin vs placebo
JUPITER, 2008 - rosuvastatin vs placebo
SAGE, 2007 - atorvastatin high dose vs pravastatin
Krum, 2007 - rosuvastatin vs placebo
CORONA, 2007 - rosuvastatin vs placebo
METEOR, 2007 - rosuvastatin vs placebo
Yamada, 2007 - atorvastatin vs control
MEGA, 2006 - pravastatin vs control
Sola, 2006 - atorvastatin vs placebo
SPARCL, 2006 - atorvastatin vs placebo
Wojnicz, 2006 - atorvastatin vs control
ASPEN, 2006 - atorvastatin vs placebo
Hong, 2005 - simvastatin vs control
See also:
All cardiovascular prevention clinical trials
All heart failure clinical trials
All clinical trials of cholesterol lowering intervention
All clinical trials of rosuvastatin
|
|
Treatments
Studied treatment |
rosuvastatine 40mg/d
|
Control treatment |
placebo
|
Patients
Patients |
patients with systolic (LVEF<40%) CHF of ischemic or
nonischemic etiology |
Method and design
Randomized effectives |
40 / 46 (studied vs. control) |
Design |
Parallel groups |
Blinding |
double blind |
Follow-up duration |
6 months |
Number of centre |
21 |
Geographic area |
Australia |
Primary endpoint |
LVEF by radionuclide ventriculogram |
Results
Endpoint
Studied treat. n/N
Control treat. n/N
Graph
RR [95% CI]
All cause death
2 / 40
3 / 46
classic
0,77 [0,13;4,36]
0
2
1.0
Relative risks
|
Endpoint |
Events (%) |
Relative Risk |
95% CI |
Endpoint definition in the trial |
Ref |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
All cause death
|
2 / 40 (5,0%) |
3 / 46 (6,5%) |
0,77 |
[0,13;4,36] |
|
|
The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
|
Reference(s) used for data extraction:
0:
|
Endpoint |
studied treat. |
control treat. |
mean diff |
Absolute risk reduction (for a follow-up of 6 months)
|
Endpoint |
Events rate |
Absolute risk reduction (ARR) |
Studied treat. |
Control treat. |
All cause death |
5,00% |
6,52% |
-1,52%
|
Meta-analysis of all similar trials:
cholesterol lowering intervention in cardiovascular prevention for all chronical situations
cholesterol lowering intervention in heart failure for all type of patients
Reference(s)
TrialResults-center ID |
TRC7339
|
Trials register # |
NA
|
-
Krum H, Ashton E, Reid C, Kalff V, Rogers J, Amarena J, Singh B, Tonkin A.
Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of high-dose HMG CoA reductase inhibitor therapy on ventricular remodeling, pro-inflammatory cytokines and neurohormonal parameters in patients with chronic systolic heart failure..
J Card Fail 2007;13:1-7
Pubmed
|
Hubmed
| Fulltext
|