Arakawa 1996.

Methods	4‐week placebo washout period 12‐week before‐and‐after study
Participants	73 men and women with type IIa and IIb hyperlipidaemia aged 20‐64 years old, hypertension, mild diabetes, obesity, cholelithiasis TC ≥ 260 mg/dL (6.72 mmol/L) TG < 400 mg/dL (4.52 mmol/L) Exclusion criteria: secondary hyperlipidaemia, hypothyroidism, Cushings syndrome, obstructive gallbladder disease, SLE, nephrotic syndrome, poorly controlled diabetes, severe hypertension, alcohol abuse, drug‐induced hyperlipidaemia, dietary treatment for obesity, heart, brain, kidney, liver diseases, MI within 3 months, cerebrovascular disorder, statin hypersensitivity, pregnancy potential and lactation, those participants considered inappropriate by the investigator Cerivastatin 0.05 mg/d baseline TC: 7.30 mmol/L (282 mg/dL) Cerivastatin 0.15 mg/d baseline TC: 7.79 mmol/L (301 mg/dL) Cerivastatin 0.15 mg/d baseline LDL‐C: 5.66 mmol/L (219 mg/dL) Cerivastatin 0.3 mg/d baseline TC: 7.98 mmol/L (309 mg/dL) Cerivastatin 0.3 mg/d baseline LDL‐C: 5.76 mmol/L (223 mg/dL)
Interventions	Cerivastatin 0.15 mg/d evening dosing Cerivastatin 0.3 mg/d evening dosing
Outcomes	Percentage change from baseline at 4‐12 weeks of blood TC and LDL‐C
Source of funding	Unknown
Notes	HDL‐C and TG data were excluded because the given data and the calculated values differed by > 10%
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‐C	Low risk	Lipid parameters were measured in a remote laboratory
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) WDAE	High risk	No comparison possible
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Total cholesterol	Low risk	All participants were included in the efficacy analysis for the cerivastatin 0.15 mg/d group for TC [(40‐39)/40]*100 = 2.5% participants were not included in the efficacy analysis for the cerivastatin 0.3 mg/d group
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) LDL cholesterol	Low risk	[(33‐28)/33]*100 = 15.2% participants were not included in the efficacy analysis for the cerivastatin 0.15 mg/d group [(40‐39)/40]*100 = 2.5% participants were not included in the efficacy analysis for the cerivastatin 0.3 mg/d group [(73‐67)/73]*100 = 8.2% participants were not included in the efficacy analysis for combined doses
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) HDL cholesterol	High risk	Not included in the efficacy analysis because the given values and the calculated values differed by > 10%
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Triglycerides	High risk	Not included in the efficacy analysis because the given values and the calculated values differed by > 10%
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	LDL‐C outcome was reported
Other bias	Unclear risk	Source of funding not reported