Skip to main content
. 2018 Mar 6;2018(3):CD012282. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012282.pub2

AlvarezSala 2008.

Methods 10‐week dietary washout period
12‐week before and after trial
Participants 82 men and women 18‐75 years old with primary hypercholesterolaemia LDL‐C ≥130 mg/dL (≥ 3.4 mmol/L)
triglycerides ≤ 400 mg/dL (≤ 4.5 mmol/L)
exclusion criteria: congestive heart failure III‐IV; uncontrolled arrhythmia; MI; unstable angina or severe or unstable peripheral artery disease in the preceding 3 months; uncontrolled diabetes;
uncontrolled endocrine or metabolic diseases, renal or hepatic dysfunction; myopathic disorders, coagulation disorders; and /or any condition that would make protocol compliance unlikely
pregnancy or lactation and confounding drugs
44 participants received fluvastatin 80 mg/day
38 participants received fluvastatin 80 mg/day + ezetimibe 10 mg/day
Fluvastatin 80 mg/day baseline TC : 7.7 mmol/L (298 mg/dL)
 Fluvastatin 80 mg/day baseline LDL‐C : 5.6 mmol/L (217 mg/dL)
 Fluvastatin 80 mg/day baseline HDL‐C : 1.5 mmol/L (58 mg/dL)
Fluvastatin 80 mg/day baseline triglycerides: 1.6 mmol/L (142 mg/dL)
Interventions Fluvastatin XL 80 mg/day
Fluvastatin XL 80 mg/day + ezetimibe 10 mg/day
Outcomes per cent change from baseline at 12 weeks of serum TC, LDL‐C, HDL‐C, and triglycerides
Source of Funding Novartis
Notes Fluvastatin XL 80 mg/day + ezetimibe 10 mg/day group was not included in the efficacy analysis
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) High risk Controlled before and after design
Allocation concealment (selection bias) High risk Controlled before and after design
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Lipid parameter measurements unlikely influenced by lack of blinding
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 LDL‐cholesterol Low risk Lipid parameters were measured in a remote laboratory
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 WDAEs High risk No comparison possible
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk 11.4% participants were not included in the efficacy analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk LDL‐C outcome was reported
Other bias High risk Novartis funded the study