Bempedoic Acid and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Statin-Intolerant Patients
2023 · paper · Clinical trials
A randomized placebo-controlled trial of bempedoic acid in 13,970 statin-intolerant patients. Major adverse cardiovascular events were less frequent (11.7% versus 13.3%), while gout and gallstones were more common with the drug.
1 finding
Substance Figure 2B No. at Risk, placebo row reads "6978 6828 6883 6536 ...": the number at risk rises from 6828 (month 6) to 6883 (month 12)
- p. 7 Figure 2B, No. at Risk, Placebo row
6978 6828 6883 6536
- p. 7 Figure 2 Panel B, No. at Risk, placebo row
6978 6828 6883 6536 6368
Only the authors can say what is right here.
Judge's note: Page 7 image confirms the order. The number at risk cannot increase. Panel A (four-component MACE) gives 6579 at month 12 and Panel C gives 6704. The three-component composite is nested between these, so the month-12 value should lie in 6579-6704. 6683 is a likely transposition, but only the authors can confirm it.
Second check: another model agreed
Report a problem with this finding
7 minor (typos and the like; most checked by the judge only)
Wording The Discussion says "a 21.6% reduction in the high-sensitivity CRP level relative to placebo", but Results and Table 2 give −21.6 as a percentage-point difference in median percent change
- p. 9 Discussion, left column, paragraph 3
21.6% reduction in the high-sensitivity CRP level relative to placebo
- p. 5 Results, Effect on LDL Cholesterol and hs-CRP
−21.6 percentage points (95% CI, −23.7 to −19.6)
- p. 6 Table 2, median percent change in hs-CRP at 6 mo
−21.6 (−23.7 to −19.6)
- p. 6 Table 2, median percent change in hs-CRP at 6 mo
−22.2 (−23.5 to −20.8) 2.4 (0.0 to 4.2) −21.6 (−23.7 to −19.6)
Judge's note: The p5 Results text says '-21.6 percentage points (95% CI, -23.7 to -19.6)'. The Table 2 footnote defines the differences as percentage-point differences. The Discussion wording (p9) reads as a relative reduction, which is a wording point only. The arithmetic part of the cluster (-22.2 - 2.4 = -24.6 vs -21.6) is not a defect: these are medians. A between-group estimate for medians is not the difference of the two group medians, and the method is not stated in the main text. So that component is a different quantity.
Second check: another model agreed
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Byline prints "L.A. Bloedon" while the Appendix gives "LeAnne Bloedon, M.S." and the affiliation key "L.B."
- p. 1 Byline
L.A. Bloedon
- p. 11 Appendix, affiliations
N.L., L.B., P.R.
Judge's note: Checked byline (p1) and Appendix (p11). Other keys keep every initial shown in the byline (J.J.P.K., C.-F.C., M.J.L.), so a byline of L.A. would give the key L.A.B. As printed, the key L.B. and the byline L.A. do not match. This is cosmetic; either form could be the intended one.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo CLEAR acronym expansion reads "Bempedoic Acid [ECT1002]" but the compound code is given as "ETC-1002" in reference 7
- p. 2 Introduction, expansion of CLEAR acronym
Bempedoic Acid [ECT1002]
- p. 11 Reference 7
Use of ETC-1002 to treat hypercho- lesterolemia
- p. 2 Introduction, paragraph 2 (CLEAR acronym)
[ECT1002], an ACL-Inhibiting Regimen
Judge's note: The page 2 image shows '[ECT1002]'. Reference 7 on p11 reads 'Use of ETC-1002 to treat hypercholesterolemia'. The letters are transposed and the hyphen is missing, which contradicts the paper's own reference list.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo "rhabdomyolysis (Tables S4).2" uses the plural 'Tables' for a single supplementary table
- p. 8 Results, Adverse Events
(Tables S4)
- p. 8 Results, Adverse Events paragraph
olysis (Tables S4).
- p. 8 Adverse Events, rhabdomyolysis sentence
(Tables S4).2
Judge's note: The page 8 image shows '(Tables S4).' followed by superscript reference 2. The superscript placement is normal NEJM style. The plural 'Tables' with one table number is a copyediting slip.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo "Subgroups analyses were not adjusted for multiplicity" should read "Subgroup analyses"
- p. 9 Discussion, subgroup paragraph
Subgroups analyses were not adjusted for multi- plicity
- p. 9 Discussion, subgroup paragraph
Subgroups analyses were not adjusted for multi-
Judge's note: Confirmed on the page 9 image. The same paragraph uses 'subgroup analyses'.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Reference 14 abbreviates the journal as "J Clin Lipid. 2020;14:649-659.e6.", while reference 7 gives "J Clin Lipidol 2015;9:295-304."
- p. 12 Reference 14
J Clin Lipid. 2020;14:649-659.e6.
- p. 11 Reference 7
J Clin Lipidol 2015;9:295-304.
- p. 12 Reference 14
J Clin Lipid. 2020;
Judge's note: Both appear on the page images (p12 ref 14, p11 ref 7). The same journal is abbreviated inconsistently, and the page-range style differs from the rest of the list. Cosmetic.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Reference 12 gives "J Am Heart Assoc 2019;8(7):e011662-112.": an article number followed by a page-range-like suffix
- p. 12 Reference 12
2019;8(7):e011662-112.
Only the authors can say what is right here.
Judge's note: Rests on outside knowledge: that JAHA articles are identified by e-numbers alone, with no page range. The p12 image confirms the printed text 'e011662-112'. It is also the only entry in the list with an issue number. This is cosmetic, but the suffix looks malformed.
Second check: none (judge only)