Okopien 2005.

Methods	no washout period required because no patient was receiving hypolipidaemic treatment within 3 months of the trial 3‐month before and after trial
Participants	131 men and women with type IIa and IIb dyslipidaemia 33 type IIa participants received fluvastatin type IIa plasma TC > 200 mg/dL ( 5.17 mmol/L), LDL‐C >135 mg/dL (3.49 mmol/L) TG < 200 mg/dL (2.26 mmol/L) type IIb plasma TC > 200 mg/dL ( 5.17 mmol/L), LDL‐C >135 mg/dL (3.49 mmol/L) TG > 200 mg/dL (2.26 mmol/L) ineffective dietary treatment for at least 3 months common carotid intima‐media thickness ≥0.7 mm exclusion criteria: age > 65 years or < 35 years, other types of primary dyslipidaemias, secondary dyslipidaemia, acute or chronic inflammation, symptomatic congestive heart failure, unstable coronary artery disease, MI or stroke within 6 month of trial, moderate or severe arterial hypertension, hepatic or renal dysfunction, malabsorption syndromes, received other drugs that may affect trial, HRT or oral contraception and poor patient compliance Fluvastatin 40 mg/day baseline TC : 7.15 mmol/L (276 mg/dL) Fluvastatin 40 mg/day baseline LDL‐C : 4.71 mmol/L (182 mg/dL) Fluvastatin 40 mg/day baseline HDL‐C : 1.27 mmol/L (49 mg/dL) Fluvastatin 40 mg/day baseline triglycerides: 1.614 mmol/L (143 mg/dL)
Interventions	Type IIa Fluvastatin 40 mg/day Type IIa Simvastatin 20 mg/day Type IIb Ciprofibrate 100 mg/day Type IIb Fenofibrate 200 mg/day
Outcomes	per cent change from baseline at 1‐3 months of plasma TC, LDL‐C, HDL‐C, and triglycerides
Source of Funding	statuary grant NN‐4‐061/98 of the Medical University of Silesia
Notes	Type IIa Simvastatin 20 mg/day Type IIb Ciprofibrate 100 mg/day Type IIb Fenofibrate 200 mg/day groups were not included in the efficacy analysis SDs were imputed by the method of Furukawa 2006
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	Low risk	All participants were included in the efficacy analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	LDL‐C outcome was reported
Other bias	Low risk	statuary grant NN‐4‐061/98 of the Medical University of Silesia