Atorvastatin in Older Adults: Does It Prevent Heart Events and Preserve Independence?

Table of Contents

• Key Points
• Background: Why This Study Matters
• How the Study Was Conducted
• Who Participated in the Study
• Cholesterol Changes During the Study
• Main Results: Cardiovascular Events and Disability-Free Survival
• Additional Findings: Heart Attacks, Strokes, and Other Outcomes
• Safety and Side Effects
• What These Findings Mean for Patients
• Limitations of the Study
• Recommendations and Next Steps
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Source Information

Key Points

• In a trial of nearly 10,000 adults aged 70 and older without cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or dementia, atorvastatin 40 mg daily reduced major cardiovascular events by 30% versus placebo over a median of 5.9 years.
• Atorvastatin did not significantly extend disability-free survival, the combined outcome of death from any cause, dementia, or persistent physical disability.
• Heart attack risk was 43% lower and coronary revascularization risk was 43% lower with atorvastatin; the reduction in stroke risk was smaller and not statistically significant.
• Serious adverse events occurred at the same overall rate in both groups (2.7%), but muscle, liver, and diabetes-related side effects were more common with atorvastatin.
• The number needed to treat was 37, meaning 37 people would need to take atorvastatin for about 6 years to prevent one major cardiovascular event.

Background: Why This Study Matters

People around the world are living longer than ever before. The proportion of older adults who reach their 80s and 90s is now nearly double what it was in the 1950s. However, healthy life span has not kept pace with this increase in total life span. Older adults still face major health challenges from cardiovascular disease (heart and blood vessel conditions), dementia, and other disabling conditions.

Statins are medications that lower cholesterol. They are well established for reducing the risk of heart attack (myocardial infarction) and ischemic stroke (stroke caused by a blocked blood vessel) in adults at high risk. This includes people with diabetes or established cardiovascular disease. However, whether starting statin treatment in older adults without existing heart disease provides the same benefit has remained uncertain and intensely debated.

Clinical guidelines have not included strong recommendations about prescribing statins for people aged 70 and older. The evidence is especially sparse for those older than 75. Current recommendations are generally based on combined analyses of trials in which fewer than one in four participants were older than 70 years of age.

These combined analyses suggested that statins for primary prevention (preventing a first cardiovascular event) may be less effective in older adults without vascular disease than in younger people. Specifically, the reduction in cardiovascular event risk for every 38.7 mg per deciliter (1.0 mmol per liter) reduction in LDL cholesterol (low-density lipoprotein, often called "bad" cholesterol) was not statistically significant. This finding applied among older adults. The reduction was 16% among people older than 70 years and 8% among those older than 75 years.

Few randomized trials have assessed how statins affect dementia and disability. The Heart Protection Study included participants aged 40 to 82 years. That study used a single cognitive test that probably lacked the sensitivity to detect subtle cognitive decline. The number of newly identified dementia cases was too low for a definitive analysis.

Both the PROSPER (Prospective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk) and HOPE-3 (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation 3) trials included cognitive measures. However, neither formally assessed newly diagnosed dementia as a clinical end point. The JUPITER (Justification for the Use of Statins in Prevention) trial tracked dementia as an adverse event. That trial did not use standardized, objective cognitive assessments. Despite enrolling 17,802 participants, it identified very few cases of dementia (12 in the rosuvastatin group and 9 in the placebo group).

Previous studies of statins have raised concerns about muscle weakness or pain, impaired liver function, cognitive impairment, new-onset diabetes, and hemorrhagic stroke (bleeding in the brain). Older adults are more likely to take many medications than younger adults. Older adults also metabolize (process) drugs differently. Therefore, older adults face a greater risk for statin-drug interactions and adverse events than younger people. Fears of these adverse events may influence decisions about prescribing statins and may lead to patients not taking their medication as prescribed.

The overall balance of benefits and harms from statins in older adults has remained uncertain. The Statins in Reducing Events in the Elderly (STAREE) trial was conducted to provide evidence to guide statin prescribing for primary prevention in community-dwelling adults aged 70 years or older.

How the Study Was Conducted

The STAREE trial was an investigator-initiated, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, primary-prevention trial. "Double-blind" means that neither the participants nor the researchers knew who was receiving the active medication or the placebo. "Randomized" means participants were assigned to treatment groups by chance. "Placebo-controlled" means one group received an inactive tablet that looked identical to the real medication.

The trial took place at general medical practices across Australia. The trial design was described in detail previously, and the trial protocol is available with the full text of the article. The trial steering committee developed the protocol and operational plan after consulting with health care consumers and general practitioner co-investigators.

The trial had no commercial or industry involvement. The protocol was approved by the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. An independent data monitoring committee reviewed the safety and efficacy data during the trial. The funders of the trial had no role in the trial design, data collection, data management, data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript writing, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Participants and randomization. Adults aged 70 years or older who were living independently and had no history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, dementia, or other life-limiting conditions were identified. These adults were identified from the clinical databases of 1,013 general medical practices. These practices were among 1,583 registered practices across metropolitan, regional, and rural areas of Australia.

For trial eligibility, cardiovascular disease was defined as any of the following:

• Myocardial infarction (heart attack)
• Angina (chest pain from reduced blood flow to the heart)
• Heart failure
• Stroke
• Transient ischemic attack (a temporary stroke-like episode)
• Carotid stenosis (narrowing of the neck arteries)
• Abdominal aortic aneurysm (bulging of the main abdominal blood vessel)
• Peripheral artery disease (reduced blood flow to the legs)
• Any coronary-artery blockage or narrowing that led to angioplasty, stent implantation, or bypass graft surgery

Eligible participants were invited to take part in two baseline screening visits 4 weeks apart. These visits included cognitive tests to assess cognitive performance, assessment of physical independence using a modified Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living, and laboratory assessments. Between the two visits, participants were asked to take a once-daily placebo tablet to assess how well they could stick to a daily medication routine. All participants provided written informed consent.

A web-based system randomly assigned participants in a 1:1 ratio to the atorvastatin group or the placebo group. The randomization schedule was generated by an independent statistician. For both groups, the starting dose was one tablet daily for 4 weeks. The dose increased to two tablets daily if the safety profile was acceptable. In the atorvastatin group, each tablet contained 20 mg of medication, for a total dose of 40 mg after the 4-week dose-adjustment period. Further dose adjustment (de-escalation and re-escalation) was permitted to manage side effects.

Participant follow-up occurred every 6 months. Open-label statins (statins prescribed by a participant's usual doctor, with the assigned trial regimen discontinued) could be prescribed at the discretion of the treating clinician. Fasting lipid levels were measured at baseline and at the end of the trial.

End points. The trial had two primary end points. The first was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, or coronary revascularization (a procedure to restore blood flow to the heart). The second was a composite of death from any cause, dementia, or persistent physical disability — a measure of disability-free survival.

Reported events suspected of being primary end-point events were reviewed by committees whose members did not know the trial-group assignments. Prespecified secondary end points included:

• Death from cardiovascular causes or nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke
• Fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction
• Fatal or nonfatal stroke
• Coronary revascularization
• Any arterial revascularization
• Death from any cause
• Dementia
• Persistent physical disability
• Hospitalization for any cause

Adverse events were coded according to the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), version 21.0. The seriousness of adverse events was categorized according to the 2007 National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research of the National Health and Medical Research Council. Adverse events of special interest included new diagnoses of myopathy (muscle disease), myositis (muscle inflammation), rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown), liver failure, and diabetes. Adverse events were considered related to the trial regimen if the trial physician, who did not know the trial-group assignments, judged that a causal relationship was possible, probable, or definite.

Statistical analysis. Analyses were performed after the data were locked in February 2026, according to the prespecified statistical analysis plan. The researchers calculated that 619 primary cardiovascular events and 1,397 primary events related to disability-free survival would provide the trial with 80.0% power. This power was to detect a difference of 20.2% in the risk of major cardiovascular events. The power was also to detect a difference of 14.5% in the risk of death, dementia, or persistent physical disability between the atorvastatin group and the placebo group. Based on expected event rates, the researchers aimed to enroll 9,631 participants to be followed for an average of 6 years.

The primary end points were assessed in time-to-event analyses, as prespecified in the statistical analysis plan. All comparisons of end points were performed according to an intention-to-treat approach. This means participants were analyzed in the group to which they were assigned, regardless of whether they took the medication. Event rates were compared between the trial groups using Cox proportional-hazards regression, with results expressed as cause-specific hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

A closed testing procedure was used to account for multiple testing because there were two primary end points. This prespecified approach was based on the expectation that cardiovascular benefit would be the main contributor to improved disability-free survival. The approach also assumed that a substantial effect of statins on disability-free survival would be unlikely without a cardiovascular benefit. The cardiovascular end point was tested first at a two-sided alpha level of 0.05. If the P value was less than 0.05, then the disability-free survival end point was tested at a two-sided alpha level of 0.05.

Analyses of the secondary end points also used Cox proportional-hazards regression models based on the time to the first event that met the end-point definition. No statistical adjustment was made for the multiple secondary end points. Because the widths of the confidence intervals were not adjusted for multiplicity, they should not be used to infer treatment effects. The cumulative incidence was estimated for all end points, with death from causes other than those included in the end point accounted for as a competing risk. Prespecified subgroup analyses were undertaken as outlined in the statistical analysis plan. Safety analyses were conducted in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all participants who received at least one dose of atorvastatin or placebo.

Who Participated in the Study

Between July 2015 and March 2023, a total of 9,971 participants underwent randomization. Of these, 4,984 participants were assigned to receive atorvastatin and 4,987 to receive placebo. The characteristics of the participants at baseline were similar in the two trial groups.

The mean age of participants was 74.7 years (standard deviation, 4.5 years), and 51.9% were women. Most participants reported current alcohol use and no history of smoking. The median number of medications at baseline was two (interquartile range, one to four). Nearly one in five participants (19.6%) were taking at least five medications. The most common medication types were:

• Blood-pressure-lowering agents: 46.3%
• Agents for acid-related gastrointestinal disorders: 27.1%
• Analgesic agents (pain relievers): 20.6%

A total of 5.2% of participants reported previous statin use. The most common previous medical conditions were cancer and depression. Memory symptoms were uncommon at baseline, reported in 4.8% of participants. However, muscle symptoms were common, reported in 46.1% of participants.

The median body-mass index (BMI, the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) was 27.0 (interquartile range, 24.3 to 30.1). The mean blood pressure was 136/80 mm Hg. The median cognitive score was 95 for those who completed the Modified Mini-Mental State (3MS) examination in person and 70 for those who completed the examination by telephone. Scores range from 0 to 100 for in-person assessment and from 0 to 73 for telephone assessment, with higher scores indicating better cognitive functioning.

A total of 8,849 participants (88.7%) reported having no difficulty with any of the six activities included on a modified Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living. These activities were bathing, dressing, toileting, transferring, walking across a small room, and feeding. The remaining participants reported minor difficulty, a little difficulty, or some difficulty with one or more of the activities.

Participants were followed for a median of 5.9 years. Complete assessment for vital status was available through a median of 6.4 years by means of linkage to death record registers for 99.9% of the participants. Similar numbers of participants in the atorvastatin and placebo groups withdrew consent after randomization. Among those who began taking atorvastatin or placebo as assigned, fewer participants in the atorvastatin group than in the placebo group permanently discontinued the trial regimen.

In the atorvastatin group, 80.2% of participants were still taking atorvastatin at 1 year, 66.1% at 3 years, and 55.6% at 5 years. The corresponding percentages in the placebo group were 79.5%, 61.3%, and 47.0%. Open-label statin use was reported by an estimated 2.1% of participants in the atorvastatin group by the end of year 1, 5.9% by the end of year 3, and 9.4% by the end of year 5. The corresponding estimated percentages in the placebo group were 3.5%, 12.1%, and 19.4%.

Cholesterol Changes During the Study

At baseline, the mean total cholesterol level was 211±32 mg per deciliter (5.46±0.83 mmol per liter). The mean LDL cholesterol level was 127±28 mg per deciliter (3.27±0.72 mmol per liter). The mean HDL (high-density lipoprotein, often called "good" cholesterol) level was 62±17 mg per deciliter (1.59±0.45 mmol per liter). The mean triglyceride level was 113±54 mg per deciliter (1.28±0.61 mmol per liter). Lipid levels were similar in the two groups at the start of the study.

At the end of follow-up, the mean reduction in total cholesterol was 53 mg per deciliter (1.37 mmol per liter) in the atorvastatin group. The mean reduction in total cholesterol was 18 mg per deciliter (0.47 mmol per liter) in the placebo group. The LDL cholesterol level was reduced by a mean of 48 mg per deciliter (1.23 mmol per liter) in the atorvastatin group. The LDL cholesterol level was reduced by a mean of 16 mg per deciliter (0.42 mmol per liter) in the placebo group.

The between-group difference in the mean reduction was 35 mg per deciliter (95% confidence interval [CI], 33 to 37; 0.90 mmol per liter; 95% CI, 0.84 to 0.95) for total cholesterol. The between-group difference in the mean reduction was 31 mg per deciliter (95% CI, 30 to 33; 0.81 mmol per liter; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.86) for LDL cholesterol. In plain terms, atorvastatin lowered LDL cholesterol by about 31 mg per deciliter more than placebo did.

Main Results: Cardiovascular Events and Disability-Free Survival

In the overall trial population, 709 participants (7.1%) had a primary cardiovascular event, and 1,313 participants (13.2%) had a primary end-point event related to disability-free survival.

Among the primary cardiovascular events, the first event was:

• Death from cardiovascular causes: 83 of 709 participants (11.7%)
• Nonfatal myocardial infarction: 208 participants (29.3%)
• Nonfatal stroke: 247 participants (34.8%)
• Coronary revascularization: 171 participants (24.1%)

Among the primary end-point events related to disability-free survival, the first event was:

• Death from any cause: 650 of 1,313 participants (49.5%)
• Dementia: 548 participants (41.7%)
• Persistent physical disability: 115 participants (8.8%)

Cardiovascular events. Primary cardiovascular events occurred in 297 participants (10.9 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 412 participants (15.5 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.61 to 0.82; P<0.001). A hazard ratio of 0.70 means that the risk of a major cardiovascular event was 30% lower in the atorvastatin group than in the placebo group. This result was statistically highly significant, meaning there is less than a 0.1% probability that the finding was due to chance alone.

The number needed to treat to prevent one major cardiovascular event at the median follow-up of 5.9 years was 37. This means that 37 people would need to take atorvastatin for about 6 years to prevent one major cardiovascular event.

Disability-free survival. A primary end-point event related to disability-free survival occurred in 637 participants (21.6 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 676 participants (23.0 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.84 to 1.05; P=0.25). This result was not statistically significant. In other words, atorvastatin did not significantly extend the time that older adults lived without death, dementia, or persistent physical disability.

Additional Findings: Heart Attacks, Strokes, and Other Outcomes

The secondary end points provided further detail about how atorvastatin affected specific health outcomes.

Death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 236 participants (8.6 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 315 participants (11.7 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.87).

Nonfatal or fatal myocardial infarction occurred in 79 participants (2.9 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 137 participants (5.0 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.75). This represents a 43% lower risk of heart attack with atorvastatin.

Nonfatal or fatal stroke occurred in 122 participants (4.4 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 138 participants (5.1 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.68 to 1.11). This difference was not statistically significant.

Coronary revascularization occurred in 110 participants (4.0 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 190 participants (7.0 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 0.57 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.72).

Any arterial revascularization occurred in 127 participants (4.6 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 221 participants (8.2 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 0.56 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.70).

Dementia occurred in 290 participants (10.6 events per 1,000 person-years) in the atorvastatin group and in 280 participants (10.3 events per 1,000 person-years) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 1.03 (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.21). This means there was no significant difference in dementia risk between the two groups.

Persistent physical disability occurred in 60 participants in the atorvastatin group and in 55 participants in the placebo group. The hazard ratio was 1.09 (95% CI, 0.76 to 1.57). This difference was not statistically significant.

Safety and Side Effects

Serious adverse events occurred in 131 participants (2.7%) in the atorvastatin group and in 129 participants (2.7%) in the placebo group. The overall rate of serious adverse events was the same in both groups.

However, musculoskeletal (muscle and bone), hepatobiliary (liver and bile duct), and diabetes-related adverse events occurred more commonly in the atorvastatin group than in the placebo group. This finding is consistent with previous concerns about statin side effects in older adults.

The trial specifically monitored for adverse events of special interest, including new diagnoses of myopathy (muscle disease), myositis (muscle inflammation), rhabdomyolysis (severe muscle breakdown), liver failure, and diabetes.

What These Findings Mean for Patients

This trial provides the strongest evidence to date about the effects of statins in older adults without existing cardiovascular disease. The results show a clear benefit for preventing major cardiovascular events. Atorvastatin reduced the risk of heart attack, stroke, or the need for a coronary procedure by 30% compared with placebo.

The benefit was driven mainly by reductions in heart attacks and coronary revascularization procedures. The risk of heart attack was 43% lower with atorvastatin. The risk of needing a coronary revascularization procedure was also 43% lower. The reduction in stroke risk was smaller and did not reach statistical significance.

However, the trial did not show that atorvastatin extended disability-free survival. The combined outcome of death from any cause, dementia, or persistent physical disability was not significantly different between the two groups. This means that while atorvastatin prevented heart-related events, it did not help older adults live longer without dementia or physical disability.

The dementia findings are particularly important. Dementia occurred at nearly identical rates in both groups (10.6 events per 1,000 person-years with atorvastatin versus 10.3 events per 1,000 person-years with placebo). This suggests that atorvastatin neither increased nor decreased the risk of dementia in this population.

For patients and their doctors, these findings support a personalized approach. Older adults without cardiovascular disease who are considering statin therapy should discuss the potential benefits with their health care provider. The potential benefits include fewer heart attacks and coronary procedures. Older adults should also discuss the potential risks with their health care provider. The potential risks include muscle symptoms, liver-related effects, and diabetes-related effects.

Limitations of the Study

The trial had several limitations that are important to understand.

First, the trial enrolled community-dwelling older adults who were living independently and had no history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or dementia. The results may not apply to older adults who are frailer, who live in nursing homes, or who have multiple chronic conditions.

Second, the median follow-up was 5.9 years. It is possible that a longer follow-up period might show different effects on disability-free survival or dementia risk. Dementia and physical disability often develop slowly, and a longer observation period might be needed to detect differences.

Third, the trial used a fixed dose of atorvastatin (40 mg daily). Different doses or different statins might produce different results.

Fourth, the trial population was predominantly White (98.3%) and English-speaking (95.7%). The findings may not be fully generalizable to other racial or ethnic groups.

Fifth, the trial did not adjust for multiple comparisons in the secondary end points. The confidence intervals for secondary outcomes should not be used to infer definitive treatment effects.

Sixth, some participants in the placebo group started taking open-label statins during the trial. By year 5, an estimated 19.4% of placebo-group participants were taking open-label statins. This could have reduced the apparent difference between the two groups.

Recommendations and Next Steps

Based on the STAREE trial results, the following points may help guide discussions between patients and their health care providers:

1. For older adults without cardiovascular disease, atorvastatin 40 mg daily reduces the risk of major cardiovascular events, including heart attack and the need for coronary procedures.
2. The number needed to treat is 37. This means 37 people need to take atorvastatin for about 6 years to prevent one major cardiovascular event.
3. Atorvastatin does not appear to extend disability-free survival or reduce the risk of dementia in this population.
4. Serious adverse events occur at the same overall rate with atorvastatin and placebo (2.7% in both groups).
5. Muscle, liver, and diabetes-related side effects occur more commonly with atorvastatin. Patients should report any new muscle pain, weakness, or other symptoms to their doctor.
6. Patients should discuss their individual risk factors, preferences, and health goals with their health care provider before starting or stopping a statin.

The STAREE trial results will likely inform future clinical guidelines for statin use in older adults. The findings support the use of statins for cardiovascular prevention in older adults without existing heart disease. However, the results do not support the use of statins specifically to prevent dementia or to extend disability-free survival.

Future research may help identify which older adults are most likely to benefit from statin therapy and which are at highest risk for side effects. Research may also clarify whether longer treatment periods or different statin doses produce different effects on disability-free survival.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who took part in the trial of atorvastatin in older adults?

The trial enrolled nearly 10,000 adults aged 70 and older who lived independently and had no history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or dementia. The average age was about 75, and just over half were women. Most participants reported no memory symptoms at the start, though muscle symptoms were common. Results may not apply to frailer older adults or those in nursing homes.

What did the trial find about heart attacks and strokes?

Taking atorvastatin 40 mg daily reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events by 30% compared with placebo over a median of 5.9 years. Heart attack risk was 43% lower, and the need for a coronary procedure was also 43% lower. The reduction in stroke risk was smaller and was not statistically significant.

Did atorvastatin help people live longer without dementia or disability?

No. The combined outcome of death from any cause, dementia, or persistent physical disability was not significantly different between the atorvastatin and placebo groups. Dementia occurred at nearly identical rates in both groups. This means atorvastatin did not extend disability-free survival or reduce dementia risk in this population of older adults without existing cardiovascular disease.

What does the number needed to treat of 37 mean?

The number needed to treat was 37. This means that 37 people would need to take atorvastatin for about 6 years to prevent one major cardiovascular event, such as a heart attack or a procedure to restore blood flow to the heart. It describes how many people must be treated for one person to benefit.

What side effects were reported with atorvastatin?

Serious adverse events occurred at the same overall rate in both groups (2.7%). However, muscle, liver, and diabetes-related side effects were more common with atorvastatin. The trial monitored specifically for new diagnoses of muscle disease, muscle inflammation, severe muscle breakdown, liver failure, and diabetes. Patients should report any new muscle pain or weakness to their doctor.

Should I start or stop a statin based on these results?

These findings support a personalized approach. Older adults without cardiovascular disease who are considering statin therapy should discuss the potential benefits, such as fewer heart attacks and coronary procedures, and the potential risks, including muscle, liver, and diabetes-related effects, with their health care provider. Individual risk factors, preferences, and health goals should guide the decision.

What were the limitations of this trial?

The trial enrolled independently living older adults without cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or dementia, so results may not apply to frailer people or those with multiple chronic conditions. Follow-up lasted a median of 5.9 years, and longer periods might show different effects. The population was predominantly White and English-speaking, and some placebo participants started open-label statins.

I'm 74 with no heart disease or diabetes — should I start atorvastatin, and when should I get a second opinion?

In adults aged 70 and older without cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or dementia, atorvastatin 40 mg daily lowered the risk of major cardiovascular events by 30% over a median of 5.9 years, with 37 people needing treatment for about 6 years to prevent one event. It did not extend disability-free survival or reduce dementia, and muscle, liver, and diabetes-related side effects were more common. Because the balance of benefits and harms depends on individual risk factors, preferences, and health goals, a second opinion can help clarify whether statin therapy is appropriate for you. Diagnostic Detectives Network provides independent expert second opinions.

Source Information

Original article title: Atorvastatin, Cardiovascular Events, and Disability-free Survival in Older Adults

Authors: S. Zoungas, R. Wolfe, C. Moran, S.J. Nicholls, G.C. Cloud, C.M. Reid, A.M. Tonkin, L. Beilin, A.S. Wierzbicki, T.T.-J. Chong, J.C. Broder, A.J. Curtis, Z. Flanagan, I. Hopper, J. Ryan, S. Spark, J.J. McNeil, and M.R. Nelson, for the STAREE Investigators

Publication: The New England Journal of Medicine. Published August 29, 2026, at NEJM.org. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2607314. Copyright © 2026 Massachusetts Medical Society.

Trial registration: STAREE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02099123.

Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council and others.

This patient-friendly article is based on peer-reviewed research.