PACT 2004.
Methods |
Design: multi‐center randomized controlled trial Setting: 6 centers in Australia Patient recruitment: unspecified Blinding: patients and caregivers, but not outcome adjudicators Intention‐to‐treat: yes Follow‐up period: 1 month Lost to follow‐up: 85 (2%) |
|
Participants |
Number randomized: statin 1710, control 1698 Mean age (SD) in years: statin 62 (12), control 61 (12) Men, n (%): statin 1308 (76%), control 1285 (76%) Diabetes, n (%): statin 244 (14%), control 234 (14%) Hypertension, n (%): statin 700 (41%), control 714 (42%) Current smoker, n (%): statin 608 (36%), control 575 (34%) Prior myocardial infarction, n (%): statin 236 (14%), control 197 (12%) Index event, n (%):
Inclusion criteria: 24 hours of the onset of symptoms if they had electrocardiographic changes suggestive of an acute MI or unstable angina Exclusion criteria: taking statin therapy before their event (other lipid‐lowering therapies were permitted), participation in any other clinical trial or the taking of an investigational drug within the previous 30 days, planned coronary revascularization or cardiac transplantation, severe renal or hepatic disease or other severe disease, drug‐ or alcohol‐related problems, gastrointestinal disease or a history of gastrointestinal surgery that might affect drug absorption, and known hypersensitivity or previous serious adverse reactions to statin therapy Women of child‐bearing potential |
|
Interventions | Pravastatin 20 to 40 mg | |
Outcomes | Primary: composite of death, non‐fatal MI, and non‐fatal stroke, death from any cause, cardiovascular death, fatal MI, non‐fatal MI, total stroke, unstable angina requiring emergency hospitalization | |
Source | Bristol‐Myers Squibb, Australia | |
Daily intervention | Usual care | |
Control | Placebo | |
Notes | Outcome data available at 1 month; trial stopped early due to recruitment difficulties | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Sequence generation unspecified |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Unreported |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Reported blinding of participants and caregivers, but not outcome assessors |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 2% of participants were lost to follow‐up |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Author contact established; data on relevant outcomes provided |
Other bias | Low risk | Adherence to intention‐to‐treat principle; not stopped early for benefit |