Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-INTB-20 standard review
Statins slightly raise diabetes risk
Statins and risk of incident diabetes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomised statin trials.
Overview
Sattar N et al.. Lancet 2010 · PMID 20167359 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61965-6
About one extra diabetes case per 255 people treated for 4 years.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Test statin-diabetes link
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis of RCTs
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
91,140
- What was actually found?
9% higher risk
- How large was the observed effect?
OR 1.09; NNH 255 over 4 years
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Statins have a small diabetes risk that is usually outweighed by fewer heart attacks.
- What are the study's limitations?
Abstract only
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports that statins are not harmless; contradicts a ban.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Sattar N et al.
- Journal
- Lancet
- Year
- 2010
- Identifier
- PMID 20167359 DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61965-6
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
Funding: none (abstract)
2. Research question
Do statins increase the risk of developing diabetes?
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Meta-analysis – Meta-analysis of 13 RCTs
- Population
Participants of statin endpoint trials
- Country
Multinational
- Period
trials 1994-2009
- Sample size
91,140
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
RCTs >1000 patients, >1 year; excluded transplant and haemodialysis
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Statin
- Comparator
Control
- Endpoints
Incident diabetes
- Statistical methods
Random-effects meta-analysis
5. Actual results
- Results
Statins associated with 9% higher risk of incident diabetes (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.17; I2 11%). Treating 255 (95% CI 150-852) patients for 4 years caused one extra case of diabetes. Risk highest in older participants.
- Absolute risks
1 extra diabetes case per 255 treated for 4 years
- Authors' conclusion
Statin therapy slightly increases diabetes risk, but the risk is low in absolute terms and compared with the reduction in coronary events.
6. Strengths
- RCT data incl. unpublished
7. Weaknesses
- Diabetes was not a primary endpoint of trials
- Abstract only read
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- AMSTAR 2
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- low
- Rationale
RCT-based meta-analysis.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Small, precise excess.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Fair point for statin critics: a real, small diabetes risk; authors conclude practice should not change for moderate/high risk.
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
High.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Quantifies a genuine statin harm.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | high |
| Risk of bias | low |
| Precision of results | moderate |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | high |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
15. Linked fact checks
- For six or seven years he alone has said that statins (Crestor, Ator, Lipitor) are forbidden, and that Controloc (pantoprazole) is forbidden. – Studies with mixed or unclear results