Dear Editor,
Alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) continues to be a major public health challenge, affecting millions of individuals worldwide [
1,
2]. It ranks as the second most common cause of liver-related mortality globally and remains the leading cause across Europe [
2]. Cardiovascular risk factors are common in the general population and are also prevalent among patients with ALD. While statins are widely recognized for their role in both primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention, not all statins are the same [
3,
4]. Based on solubility, statins are classified as either lipophilic or hydrophilic, and several studies have compared their cardiovascular effects accordingly [
3,
5]. Beyond lipid-lowering, statins are increasingly acknowledged for their pleiotropic effects, particularly their anti-inflammatory and antifibrotic properties, which are highly relevant in chronic liver diseases [
6]. However, no study to date has specifically examined whether the lipophilicity of statins influences liver-related outcomes, particularly in patients with ALD.
This population-based study aimed to assess the association between statin use and the risk of death, major adverse liver outcomes (MALO), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), other cardiovascular outcomes, alcoholassociated hepatitis (AH), and acute pancreatitis among individuals with alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD). The analysis utilized multicenter data from the TriNetX database, which reflects a broad and diverse patient population across various insurance types, socioeconomic backgrounds, ethnicities, and geographic regions [
7]. We accessed data through the TriNetX research platform, a federated network providing real-time, anonymized electronic health records. The data were sourced from the Collaborative Network of a U.S.-based healthcare organization (HCO), which includes hospitals, primary care centers, and specialty clinics. These HCOs contribute data from both insured and uninsured patients. TriNetX is a global health-collaborative platform that supports clinical research by aggregating real-time medical data from a wide range of HCOs [
8]. Patients with a history of other liver diseases, cancer, or end-stage renal disease were excluded. To minimize confounding, we performed 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) using nearest-neighbor greedy matching. Matching accounted for demographic variables, comorbidities, pre-index medication use, and relevant laboratory values. Additionally, we matched patients based on their receipt of alcohol use disorder treatment.
The main exposure in this study was statin type, categorized by lipophilicity: atorvastatin, simvastatin, pitavastatin, and fluvastatin were considered lipophilic, while rosuvastatin and pravastatin were classified as hydrophilic [
9]. To account for variations in statin types and dosages, equivalent doses were standardized to atorvastatin 10 mg (e.g., rosuvastatin 5 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, pravastatin 40 mg, fluvastatin 80 mg, and pitavastatin 1 mg) [
9]. Use of hydrophilic statins was compared to lipophilic statins, which served as the reference group. The index date was defined as the initial prescription date of a statin. Time-to-event outcomes were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier estimates, and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. A two-sided
P-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Patients with prior events of MALO, MACE, or acute pancreatitis were excluded from the analysis, while those with a history of AH were retained. The outcomes were assessed over a 5-year follow-up period.
After propensity score matching, a total of 992 individuals with ALD receiving statin therapy were included in the analysis, with 496 patients each in the lipophilic and hydrophilic statin groups. Baseline demographic, clinical, medication-related, and laboratory characteristics were well balanced between the two groups (
Supplementary Table 1). The prevalence of comorbidities, use of concomitant medications (including acamprosate and naltrexone), and key laboratory values were comparable across groups. Propensity scores were also well matched (
Supplementary Fig. 1).
Use of hydrophilic statins was not associated with a significantly different risk of MALO compared to lipophilic statins (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.86–1.49;
P=0.134). No significant differences were observed in the risk of AH (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.73–1.39,
P=0.964) or acute pancreatitis (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.38–1.26;
P=0.548) (
Fig. 1 and
Supplementary Table 2).
All-cause mortality did not differ significantly between the lipophilic and hydrophilic statin groups (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75–1.32,
P=0.257) (
Fig. 1). Similarly, rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were comparable between groups (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70–1.29,
P=0.615). No significant differences were observed in the risk of ischemic heart disease (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.61–1.74,
P=0.758), or stroke (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.87–1.95;
P=0.066). Additionally, the risk of arrhythmia (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65–1.17;
P=0.260) and heart failure (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.67–1.27;
P=0.825) did not differ significantly between the two groups (
Fig. 1 and
Supplementary Table 2).
Our study found that lipophilic statins were associated with a non-significantly different risk of developing MALO after PSM in patients with ALD. This finding contrast with the biological properties of statins, as the superior ability of lipophilic statins to penetrate hepatocytes may allow for more substantial local pleiotropic effects, such as anti-inflammatory and antioxidant actions, that directly impact liver health [
8].
Similarly, overall 5-year mortality, MACE, and other cardiovascular outcomes were comparable between ALD patients receiving lipophilic versus hydrophilic statins. Prior studies in populations beyond ALD have reported better cardiovascular outcomes associated with lipophilic statins [
9,
10], while others have shown more favorable results with hydrophilic statins [
11]. The lack of significant differences in our cohort may be attributable to the complex pathophysiology of ALD, which involves pronounced systemic inflammation, oxidative stress, and endothelial dysfunction, often in the context of comorbidities such as malnutrition and metabolic risk factors [
12,
13]. These factors contribute to a markedly elevated baseline cardiovascular risk in this population. It is plausible that the profound systemic effects of ALD overshadow more modest differences in cardiovascular protection potentially linked to statin hydrophilicity or li-pophilicity [
9]. Therefore, the selection of statin therapy in ALD patients may be guided more by considerations of hepatic tolerability and safety rather than by optimization of cardiovascular benefit based on physicochemical properties. Nevertheless, statins are considered safe in liver disease, including compensated cirrhosis, and have been associated with lower mortality and risk of decompensation [
14]. Furthermore, patients with ALD face a high risk of mortality from non-cardiovascular causes, including MALO. This substantial competing risk may reduce the likelihood of detecting statistically significant differences in cardiovascular outcomes, as many patients may succumb to liver-related complications, particularly MALO, before experiencing cardiovascular events. Consequently, any true differential effect of statin type on cardiovascular endpoints may be attenuated or obscured in this high-risk population. Further research is warranted to clarify these effects specifically within the ALD population.
Several limitations should be acknowledged. First, reliance on diagnostic codes may have resulted in underestimation or misclassification of ALD despite the use of standardized coding systems. Second, residual differences in alcohol consumption, some laboratory markers, and cirrhosis severity between groups could not be fully accounted for due to limitations in available data and propensity score matching [
10]. Third, changes in statin dosage over time were not captured, and thus, a dose-dependent effect could not be assessed. Additionally, alcohol consumption itself was not accounted for, which may influence outcomes and introduce residual confounding. Fourth, our cohort was predominantly composed of White individuals, potentially limiting the generalizability of findings to more diverse populations. Fifth, some ALD cases may have been misclassified as MetALD, which could affect the accuracy of cohort definitions [
13].
In conclusion, this study found that among patients with ALD, the overall 5-year mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, MALO, AH, and acute pancreatitis were similar between the two statin groups. Future research should investigate whether patient-specific factors modify the comparative effectiveness of hydrophilic versus lipophilic statins in individuals with ALD.
FOOTNOTES
-
Data availability statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the TriNetX Analytics Network. https://trinetx.com.
-
Authors’ contributions
All authors approve the final version of the manuscript, including the authorship list and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript for submission. Conceptualization: Pojsakorn Danpanichkul, Suthat Liangpunsakul. Data curation: Pojsakorn Danpanichkul, Benjamin Nah. Formal analysis: Pojsakorn Danpanichkul, Benjamin Nah. Supervision: Suthat Liangpunsakul, Donghee Kim. Validation: Donghee Kim, Benjamin Nah. Writing, original draft: Pojsakorn Danpanichkul, Karn Wijarnpreecha. Writing, review, and editing: Donghee Kim, Suthat Liangpunsakul.
-
Conflicts of Interest
The authors have no conflicts to disclose.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
Supplementary material is available at Clinical and Molecular Hepatology website (
http://www.e-cmh.org).
Supplementary Figure 1.
Propensity score distribution of patients with alcohol-associated liver disease receiving lipophilic or hydrophilic statins, before (A) and after (B) matching.
Figure 1.Forest plot of hazard ratios (HRs) comparing clinical outcomes between hydrophilic and lipophilic statin users with alcohol-associated liver disease. Lipophilic statins were used as the reference group in this analysis.
Abbreviations
alcohol-related liver disease
metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-associated steatotic liver disease
REFERENCES
- 1. Danpanichkul P, Díaz LA, Suparan K, Tothanarungroj P, Sirimangklanurak S, Auttapracha T, et al. Global epidemiology of alcohol-related liver disease, liver cancer, and alcohol use disorder, 2000-2021. Clin Mol Hepatol 2025;31:525-547.
- 2. Alvarado-Tapias E, Pose E, Gratacós-Ginès J, Clemente-Sánchez A, López-Pelayo H, Bataller R. Alcohol-associated liver disease: Natural history, management and novel targeted therapies. Clin Mol Hepatol 2025;31(Suppl):S112-S133.
- 3. Climent E, Benaiges D, Pedro-Botet J. Hydrophilic or lipophilic statins? Front Cardiovasc Med 2021;8:687585.
- 4. Chou R, Dana T, Blazina I, Daeges M, Jeanne TL. Statins for prevention of cardiovascular disease in adults: Evidence report and systematic review for the US preventive services task force. JAMA 2016;316:2008-2024.
- 5. El Said NO, El Wakeel LM, Khorshid H, Darweesh EAG, Ahmed MA. Impact of lipophilic vs hydrophilic statins on the clinical outcome and biomarkers of remodelling in heart failure patients: A prospective comparative randomized study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2021;87:2855-2866.
- 6. Vell MS, Loomba R, Krishnan A, Wangensteen KJ, Trebicka J, Creasy KT, et al. Association of statin use with risk of liver disease, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver-related mortality. JAMA Netw Open 2023;6:e2320222.
- 7. Wang W, Wang CY, Wang SI, Wei JC. Long-term cardiovascular outcomes in COVID-19 survivors among non-vaccinated population: A retrospective cohort study from the TriNetX US collaborative networks. EClinicalMedicine 2022;53:101619.
- 8. Palchuk MB, London JW, Perez-Rey D, Drebert ZJ, Winer-Jones JP, Thompson CN, et al. A global federated realworld data and analytics platform for research. JAMIA Open 2023;6:ooad035.
- 9. Kang MH, Kim W, Kim JS, Jeong KH, Jeong MH, Hwang JY, et al. Hydrophilic versus lipophilic statin treatments in patients with renal impairment after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11:e024649.
- 10. Bonsu KO, Reidpath DD, Kadirvelu A. Lipophilic statin versus rosuvastatin (Hydrophilic) treatment for heart failure: a metaanalysis and adjusted indirect comparison of randomised trials. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 2016;30:177-188.
- 11. Bielecka-Dabrowa A, Bytyçi I, Von Haehling S, Anker S, Jozwiak J, Rysz J, et al. Association of statin use and clinical outcomes in heart failure patients: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Lipids Health Dis 2019;18:188.
- 12. Imran T, Wong A, Schneeweiss S, Desai RJ. Statin lipophilicity and the risk of incident heart failure. Cardiology 2020;145:375-383.
- 13. Hagström H, Thiele M, Sharma R, Simon TG, Roelstraete B, Söderling J, et al. Cardiovascular outcomes in patients with biopsy-proven alcohol-related liver disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023;21:1841-1853.e12.
- 14. Dunn W, Shah VH. Pathogenesis of alcoholic liver disease. Clin Liver Dis 2016;20:445-456.
, Donghee Kim2, Benjamin Nah3, Karn Wijarnpreecha4,5,6, Suthat Liangpunsakul7,8,9
