This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Bruce A. Boselli, MD
Parke-Davis Division of Warner-Lambert Co Morris Plains, NJ

JAMA. 1991;265(15):1949-1950.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The recent article by Schulman et al¹ considers the cost-effectiveness of the use of several lipid-altering agents for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia, with the ultimate goal of reducing the risk for the development of coronary heart disease. Acknowledging that we, as the manufacturer of one of the pharmacologic agents (gemfibrozil) mentioned in this article, have a vested interest in the published results by Schulman et al, we nonetheless believe that certain issues in this study need to be addressed.

The authors assumed that all of the lipid-regulating agents (ie, cholestyramine resin, colestipol hydrochloride, gemfibrozil, lovastatin, niacin, and probucol) used in their analyses have been proved to be effective in reducing the risk of coronary heart disease. We believe this assumption cannot be presently supported from the published literature. Only cholestyramine resin² and gemfibrozil^3,4 have undergone long-term primary prevention trials that demonstrated their safety and . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?