Chinese red yeast rice (<it>Monascus purpureus</it>) for primary hyperlipidemia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

1749-8546-1-4 1749-8546 Review Chinese red yeast rice (<it>Monascus purpureus</it>) for primary hyperlipidemia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Liu Jianping Jianping.liu@fagmed.uit.no Zhang Jing n@fagmed.uit.no Shi Yi a@fagmed.uit.no Grimsgaard Sameline b@fagmed.uit.no Alraek Terje c@fagmed.uit.no Fønnebø Vinjar Vinjar.Fonnebo@fagmed.uit.no

National Research Centre in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM), University of Tromso, Tromso N-9037, Norway

Evidence-Based Medicine Centre in Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Cai Lun Lu 1200, Pudong, Shanghai 201203, China

The Institute of Traditional Chinese Medicine Literature, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Cai Lun Lu 1200, Pudong, Shanghai 201203, China

Evidence-Based Chinese Medicine Research Centre, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100029, China

Chinese Medicine 1749-8546 2006 1 1 4 http://www.cmjournal.org/content/1/1/4 17302963 10.1186/1749-8546-1-4 28 2 2006 23 11 2006 23 11 2006 2006 Liu et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Extracts of Chinese red yeast rice (RYR, a traditional dietary seasoning of Monascus purpureus) contains several active ingredients including lovastatin, and several trials of its possible lipid-lowering effects have been conducted. This meta-analysis assesses the effectiveness and safety of RYR preparations on lipid modification in primary hyperlipidemia. We included randomized controlled trials testing RYR preparation, compared with placebo, no treatment, statins, or other active lipid-lowering agents in people with hyperlipidemia through searching PubMed, CBMdisk, TCMLARS, the Cochrane Library, and AMED up to December 2004. Ninety-three randomized trials (9625 participants) were included and three RYR preparations (Cholestin, Xuezhikang and Zhibituo) were tested. The methodological quality of trial reports was generally low in terms of generation of the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, blinding, and intention-to-treat. The combined results showed significant reduction of serum total cholesterol levels (weighted mean difference -0.91 mmol/L, 95% confidence interval -1.12 to -0.71), triglycerides levels (-0.41 mmol/L, -0.6 to -0.22), and LDL-cholesterol levels (-0.73 mmol/L, -1.02 to -0.043), and increase of HDL-cholesterol levels (0.15 mmol/L, 0.09 to 0.22) by RYR treatment compared with placebo. The lipid modification effects appeared to be similar to pravastatin, simvastatin, lovastatin, atorvastatin, or fluvastatin. Compared with non-statin lipid lowering agents, RYR preparations appeared superior to nicotinate and fish oils, but equal to or less effective than fenofibrate and gemfibrozil. No significant difference in lipid profile was found between Xuezhikang and Zhibituo. RYR preparations were associated with non-serious adverse effects such as dizziness and gastrointestinal discomfort. Current evidence shows short-term beneficial effects of RYR preparations on lipid modification. More rigorous trials are needed, and long-term effects and safety should be investigated if RYR preparations are to be recommended as one of the alternative treatments for primary hyperlipidemia.

Background

Red yeast rice (RYR) is a traditional Chinese cuisine and medicinal agent prepared by using Monascus purpureus fermented with rice, which has been recorded in ancient Chinese pharmacopoeia Ben Cao Gang Mu-Dan Shi Bu Yi during the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)1. The extracts from RYR contain starch, sterols, isoflavones, and monounsaturated fatty acids, and other compounds 23; depending on Monascus strains used and fermentation conditions, it may contain polyketides called monacolins 4. Monacolin K is lovastatin, which is a commonly prescribed lipid-lowering drug. Several randomized clinical trials have indicated beneficial effects of the RYR preparations including Xuezhikang and Zhibituo in the treatment of hyperlipidemia 56789. Xuezhikang has been in clinical use as a Chinese proprietary medicine in China and has recently been marketed in several European countries including Norway and Italy. As these preparations contain different compositions and concentration of lovastatin, evaluation of their effectiveness and safety from clinical trials is warranted.

People with hyperlipidemia have responded well to the lipid-lowering agents including HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), fibrates, nicotinic acids, and n-3 fatty acids 10. However, long-term safety and potential drug interaction between statins and other hypolipidemic agents may become problematic 111213. Nowadays, many people would like to use naturaceuticals instead of chemical drugs. A previous systematic review identified four randomized trials of the lipid-lowering effects of RYR and concluded a lack of sufficient clinical research to support their efficacy 14. The objective of this review is to assess the beneficial effects of lipid modification and safety of RYR preparations for their use in people with primary hyperlipidemia.

Methods

Search strategy

To identify relevant studies, we searched the following databases up to December 2004: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Chinese Biomedical Database (CBMdisk), Traditional Chinese Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System (TCMLARS), and the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED). We used the search terms 'red yeast rice, Monascus purpureus, Xuezhikang, Cholestin, Hypochol, Hypocol, Lipascor', combined with 'hyperlipidemia, hypercholesterolemia, dyslipidemia, hypertriglyceridemia, hyperlipoproteinemia', and limited our search to clinical trials. Depending on the database, various combinations of both MeSH terms and the free text terms were used, but no limitation with regard to language and report type. We also screened the reference lists of identified papers and review articles, and contacted pharmaceutical companies.

Inclusion criteria

We included randomized clinical trials comparing RYR vs. placebo, no intervention, or established lipid-lowering agents in individuals with primary hyperlipidemia on outcomes of lipid profile and adverse effects. Eligible trials had to include adult participants meeting the National Cholesterol Education Programme diagnostic criteria of hyperlipidemia 15 and excluded secondary causes such as hypothyroidism, familial hypercholesterolemia, diabetes mellitus, liver or kidney diseases. Trials comparing different RYR preparations were included, but trials comparing different dosage of RYR preparations or comparing RYR with other herbal medicines were excluded.

Validity assessment

The methodological quality of trials was assessed using the generation of the allocation sequence, the allocation concealment, double blinding, and withdrawals/dropouts 16171819.

Data abstraction

One author (JL) extracted data and another author (JZ) cross-checked the data, and any disagreement was resolved by consensus. The following study characteristics were abstracted from the trials: design, participants and diagnosis, intervention regimen, and outcome measures.

Data synthesis

We used the statistical package (RevMan 4.2) provided by the Cochrane Collaboration for data analyses. Dichotomous data were presented as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as weighted mean difference (WMD), both with 95% confidence interval (CI). We assessed data by both random effects and fixed effect analyses, but reported the random effect analysis if the heterogeneity was significant, which was assessed by the I²statistic and used P < 0.10 as significance limit 20.

Results

Included trials

We identified 647 records on RYR preparations from electronic and manual searches. By reading titles and abstracts, we excluded 275 citations that were clearly duplicates, review articles, or non-clinical studies. A total of 372 articles published in Chinese or English were retrieved for further assessment. Of these, 279 articles were excluded because they were non-controlled clinical studies or randomized trials with different research objectives. Two of these were ongoing placebo-controlled trials testing 'Hypocol' in Norway and 'Lipolysar' in Italy 21, but data were not available while writing this report. In total, 93 randomized clinical trials 678222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111 were identified and they reported to allocate participants with primary hyperlipidemia (n = 9625) randomly to RYR preparation or no treatment (2 trials), placebo (8 trials), statins (37 trials), other lipid-lowering agents (42 trials), or to a different RYR preparation (7 trials), in which three trials had more than two arms. The 93 trials were parallel group trials, and 91 were published in Chinese and two published in English 749. Three RYR preparations were tested in the included trials: The RYR dietary supplement (Cholestin), and the Chinese proprietary medicines Xuezhikang and Zhibituo. Their constituents, dosages, and treatment regimens are listed in Table 1. All trials reported lipid profile outcome and 77 trials also reported adverse effects.

Table 1

Composition and treatment regimens of red yeast rice preparations

Preparation

Composition

Dosage

Administration

Red yeast rice dietary supplement (Cholestin) capsules

Extracts of fermented Monascus purpureus rice

2.4 g/day (containing 5 mg lovastatin)

0.6 g/cap 2 caps, twice daily

Xuezhikang capsule

Extracts from fermented Monascus purpureus rice, Fructus Crataegi, Radix Salviae miltiorrhizae, Rhizoma Curcumae longae, Radix Rhizoma rhei, etc.

1.2 g/day (containing 10 mg lovastatin)

0.3 g/cap 2 caps, twice daily

Zhibituo tablet

Extracts from fermented Monascus purpureus rice, Fructus Crataegi, Rhizoma Atractylodis macrocephalae, Rhizoma Alismatis orientalis, etc.

3.15 g/day (containing lovastatin 9 mg)

0.35 g/tab 3 tabs, thrice daily

Methodological quality of included trials

Of the 93 trials, only three trials reported the methods to generate the allocation sequence (random number table or permuted blocks) 73270, and two trials were assessed as having adequate concealment 729. Five trials applied double-blinding 725262730, and three trials blinded the outcome assessors 2951106. One trial reported prior sample size estimation and information on withdrawal/dropout 7, but no trial mentioned intention-to-treat analysis. Accordingly, the included trials had generally low methodological quality. All trials provided baseline data for the comparability among groups. The average sample size of the randomized trials was 103, ranging from 28 to 450 participants per trial.

Total cholesterol (TC) levels (Tables 2 and 3)

Table 2

Net benefit of RYR preparations in lipid profile in placebo-controlled trials

No. of subjects

Baseline

Post-treatment

Difference

P value

Mean (SD)

Mean (95% CI)

% Change

TC levels (mmol/L)

Cholestin

6.47 (0.78)

5.43 (0.80)

-1.04 (-1.38 to -0.70)

-16%

< 0.00001

Placebo

6.59 (0.75)

6.47 (0.93)

-0.12 (-0.49 to 0.25)

-2%

0.52

6.68 (0.98)

5.31 (0.84)

-1.37 (-1.83 to -0.91)

-21%

5.81 (0.63)

4.26 (0.63)

-1.55 (-1.85 to -1.25)

-27%

Xuezhikang

101

7.30 (1.40)

5.90 (1.40)

-1.40 (-1.79 to -1.01)

-19%

5.65 (1.31)

3.16 (1.31)

-2.49 (-3.15 to -1.83)

-44%

Subtotal: 194

-1.63 (-2.00 to -1.26)

< 0.00001

6.72 (0.97)

6.43 (0.93)

-0.29 (-0.79 to 0.21)

-4%

5.84 (0.67)

4.94 (0.67)

-0.90 (-1.24 to -0.56)

-15%

Placebo

6.80 (1.40)

6.70 (1.40)

-0.10 (-0.64 to 0.44)

-1%

5.55 (1.02)

4.95 (1.02)

-0.60 (-1.23 to 0.03)

-11%

Subtotal: 129

-0.50 (-0.90 to -0.11)

0.01

5.90 (0.95)

4.94 (0.65)

-0.96 (-1.71 to -0.21)

-16%

Zhibituo

6.70 (1.10)

5.80 (0.90)

-0.90 (-1.41 to -0.39)

-13%

104

7.10 (1.70)

5.60 (1.30)

-1.50 (-1.91 to -1.09)

-21%

Subtotal: 143

-1.17 (-1.59 to -0.74)

< 0.00001

5.83 (0.57)

5.56 (0.53)

-0.27 (-0.78 to 0.24)

-5%

Placebo

6.70 (1.50)

6.40 (1.30)

-0.30 (-1.01 to 0.41)

-4%

101

6.00 (1.80)

6.50 (0.70)

0.50 (0.12 to 0.88)

Subtotal: 140

0.02 (-0.56 to 0.60)

0.95

TG levels (mmol/L)

Cholestin

1.50 (0.54)

1.40 (0.50)

-0.10 (-0.32 to 0.12)

-7%

0.38

Placebo

1.61 (0.52)

1.65 (0.53)

0.04 (-0.19 to 0.27)

2.84 (0.57)

2.38 (0.62)

-0.46 (-0.76 to -0.16)

-16%

2.10 (0.92)

1.82 (0.92)

-0.28 (-0.72 to 0.16)

-13%

Xuezhikang

101

3.60 (2.40)

2.30 (1.60)

-1.30 (-1.86 to -0.74)

-36%

2.62 (0.58)

1.47 (0.58)

-1.15 (-1.44 to -0.86)

-44%

Subtotal: 194

-0.78 (-1.26 to -0.31)

0.001

2.74 (0.73)

2.57 (0.69)

-0.17 (-0.54 to 0.20)

-6%

Placebo

2.14 (0.94)

1.91 (0.94) 3.00 (1.60)

-0.23 (-0.71 to 0.25) -0.30 (-0.92 to 0.32)

-11%

3.30 (1.60)

3.00 (1.60)

-0.30 (-0.92 to 0.32)

-9%

2.50 (0.50)

2.11 (0.50)

-0.39 (-0.70 to -0.08)

-16%

Subtotal: 129

-0.29 (-0.49 to -0.09)

0.005

2.46 (1.23)

1.79 (0.57)

-0.67 (-1.41 to 0.07)

-27%

Zhibituo

3.40 (0.90)

2.10 (1.10)

-1.30 (-1.81 to -0.79)

-38%

104

3.40 (1.50)

2.30 (1.30)

-1.10 (-1.48 to -0.72)

-32%

Subtotal: 147

-1.10 (-1.38 to -0.82)

< 0.00001

2.56 (0.88)

2.36 (0.64)

-0.20 (-0.91 to 0.51)

-8%

3.40 (1.10)

3.10 (1.20)

-0.30 (-0.88 to 0.28)

-9%

Placebo

101

3.10 (0.40)

2.50 (1.40)

-0.60 (-0.88 to -0.32)

-19%

Subtotal: 140

-0.50 (-0.74 to -0.26)

< 0.0001

LDL-C levels (mmol/L)

Cholestin

4.47 (0.70)

3.49 (0.70)

-0.98 (-1.28 to -0.68)

-22%

< 0.00001

Placebo

4.65 (0.78)

4.53 (0.85)

-0.12 (-0.47 to 0.23)

-3%

0.51

3.94 (0.82)

2.83 (0.88)

-1.11 (-1.54 to -0.68)

-28%

4.13 (0.52)

2.80 (0.52)

-1.33 (-1.58 to -1.08)

-32%

Xuezhikang

101

4.80 (1.60)

3.50 (1.40)

-1.30 (-1.71 to -0.89)

-27%

3.00 (1.03)

2.10 (1.03)

-0.90 (-1.42 to -0.38)

-30%

Subtotal: 194

-1.23 (-1.41 to -1.05)

<0.00001

4.13 (0.94)

4.01 (0.86)

-0.12 (-0.59 to 0.35)

-3%

4.24 (0.53)

3.41 (0.53)

-0.83 (-1.10 to -0.56)

-20%

Placebo

4.20 (1.60)

4.30 (1.60)

0.10 (-0.52 to 0.72)

3.19 (0.87)

2.70 (0.87)

-0.49 (-1.03 to 0.05)

-15%

Subtotal: 129

-0.38 (-0.83 to 0.07)

0.10

Zhibituo

104

3.70 (1.60)

3.50 (1.40)

-0.20 (-0.61 to 0.21)

-5%

0.34

Placebo

101

3.70 (1.20)

3.70 (1.00)

0.00 (-0.30 to 0.30)

1.00

HDL-C levels (mmol/L)

Cholestin

1.29 (0.34)

1.29 (0.36)

0.00 (-0.15 to 0.15)

1.00

Placebo

1.19 (0.26)

1.19 (0.28)

0.00 (-0.12 to 0.12)

1.00

1.50 (0.46)

1.67 (0.54)

0.17 (-0.08 to 0.42)

11%

1.37 (0.21)

1.16 (0.21)

-0.21 (-0.31 to -0.11)

-15%

Xuezhikang

101

1.20 (0.40)

1.40 (0.30)

0.20 (0.10 to 0.30)

17%

1.20 (0.21)

1.22 (0.21)

0.02 (-0.09 to 0.13)

Subtotal: 194

0.04 (-0.17 to 0.24)

0.73

1.57 (0.69)

1.53 (0.32)

-0.04 (-0.32 to 0.24)

-3%

1.36 (0.24)

1.13 (0.24)

-0.23 (-0.35 to -0.11)

-17%

1.30 (0.40)

1.30 (0.30)

0.00 (-0.14 to 0.14)

Placebo

1.22 (0.25)

1.00 (0.25)

-0.22 (-0.37 to -0.07)

-18%

Subtotal: 129

-0.13 (-0.26 to -0.01)

0.04

0.89 (0.41)

1.09 (0.41)

0.20 (-0.12 to 0.52)

22%

1.08 (0.11)

1.31 (0.17)

0.23 (0.16 to 0.30)

21%

Zhibituo

104

0.85 (0.14)

0.98 (0.26)

0.13 (0.07 to 0.19)

15%

Subtotal: 147

0.18 (0.10 to 0.26)

< 0.0001

0.92 (0.19)

0.90 (0.17)

-0.02 (-0.16 to 0.12)

-2%

0.99 (0.20)

1.02 (0.28)

0.03 (-0.09 to 0.15)

Placebo

101

0.89 (0.13)

0.80 (0.30)

-0.09 (-0.15 to -0.03)

-10%

Subtotal: 144

-0.04 (-0.12 to 0.03)

0.26

Table 3

Post-treatment total cholesterol levels (mmol/L) in randomized controlled trials

Interventions

No. of trials [references]

No. of participants

Weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval)

P value

RYR vs. no intervention/placebo

Zhibituo vs. no intervention

2 [22, 23]

112

-1.27 (-1.50 to -1.05)

< 0.00001

RYR supplement vs. placebo

1 [7]

-1.04 (-1.41 to -0.67)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. placebo

4 [8, 24–26]

323

-1.04 (-1.46 to -0.62)*

< 0.00001

Zhibituo vs. placebo

3 [27–29]

283

-0.80 (-1.03 to -0.57)

< 0.00001

RYR vs. statins

Xuezhikang vs. simvastatin

15 [6, 30–43]

1455

0.05 (-0.27 to 0.37)*

0.76

Xuezhikang vs. pravastatin

7 [44–50]

594

- 0.20 (- 0.47 to 0.06)*

0.14

Xuezhikang vs. lovastatin

3 [51–53]

174

-0.05 (-0.27 to 0.18)

0.69

Xuezhikang vs. atorvastatin

1 [54]

-0.16 (-0.58 to 0.26)

0.46

Xuezhikang vs. fluvastatin

1 [55]

118

0.48 (0.24 to 0.72)

0.0001

Zhibituo vs. simvastatin

9 [32, 56–63]

728

0.11 (-0.03 to 0.25)

0.14

Zhibituo vs. provastatin

1 [22]

0.05 (-0.20 to 0.30)

0.70

Zhibituo vs. lovastatin

1 [57]

-0.11 (-0.48 to 0.26)

0.56

RYR vs. non-statin drugs

Xuezhikang vs. inositol nicotinate

7 [65–71]

624

-0.56 (-0.81 to -0.31)*

< 0.0001

Xuezhikang vs. fenofibrate

5 [32, 73–76]

337

-0.13 (-0.46 to 0.20)*

0.44

Xuezhikang vs. gemfibrozil

3 [77–79]

156

-0.43 (-1.52 to 0.65)*

0.43

Xuezhikang vs. fish oils

2 [80, 81]

116

-0.81 (-1.11 to -0.50)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. alginic sodium diester

1 [84]

-1.08 (-1.38 to -0.78)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. conjugated estrogens

1 [85]

-0.87 (-1.20 to -0.54)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. elastase

1 [86]

107

-0.10 (-0.49 to 0.29)

0.61

Xuezhikang vs. biphenalbid

1 [87]

0.12 (-0.31 to 0.55)

0.59

Zhibituo vs. inositol nicotinate

8 [88–95]

608

-0.73 (-1.13 to -0.33)*

0.0004

Zhibituo vs. fish oils

6 [97–102]

491

-0.76 (-1.04 to -0.49)*

< 0.00001

Zhibituo vs. fenofibrate

2 [32, 104]

248

0.31 (0.04 to 0.59)

0.02

RYR versus RYR

Xuezhikang vs. Zhibituo

7 [32, 106–111]

701

-0.03 (-0.25 to 0.20)*

0.82

* Random effects model

The three RYR preparations significantly reduced serum TC levels and the effect was reached at four weeks after the treatment and remained stable until 12 weeks (Figure 1). The percentage of TC level reduction was 16% for cholestin, 19%–44% for Xuezhikang, and 13%–21% for Zhibituo (Table 2). Compared with no treatment, Zhibituo showed a reduction of serum TC levels (WMD -1.27 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.50 to -1.05; 2 trials, n = 112) 2223. Compared with placebo, significant reduction of serum TC levels was found for Cholestin (WMD -1.04 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.41 to -0.67; 1 trial, n = 83) 7, Xuezhikang (WMD -1.04 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.46 to -0.62; 4 trials, n = 323) 8242526, and Zhibituo (WMD -0.80 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.03 to -0.57; 3 trials, n = 283) 272829. There was no significant heterogeneity among the trials (I²statistic test) (Table 3). Different treatment duration showed similar effect of RYR preparations in reducing TC levels compared with placebo by 4 weeks (WMD -0.96 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.49 to -0.43; 2 trials, n = 113) 2526, 6 weeks (WMD -0.61; 95% CI -1.0 to -0.22; 2 trials, n = 78) 2728, 8 weeks (WMD -1.06; 95% CI -1.39 to -0.73; 5 trials, n = 406) 78242526, and 12 weeks (WMD -1.04; 95% CI -1.41 to -0.67; 1 trial, n = 83) 7.

Figure 1

Total cholesterol levels during the treatment in 8 randomized placebo-controlled trials

Total cholesterol levels during the treatment in 8 randomized placebo-controlled trials.

Xuezhikang and Zhibituo were compared with simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, atorvastatin, or fluvastatin in 37 trials. There was no statistically significant difference in TC levels between RYR preparation and statins except for one trial, in which Xuezhikang was less effective than fluvastatin (WMD 0.48 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.72; n = 118) 55. One trial presented data as number of subjects with at least 10% reduction of TC levels, and it showed no difference between Xuezhikang and lovastatin (64/69 vs. 68/76; RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.94 to 1.15) 64. In these trials, Xuezhikang was used at dosage of 1.2 g/day (containing 10 mg of lovastatin), Zhibituo at 3.15 g/day (containing 9 mg of lovastatin), simvastatin at 10–20 mg/day, pravastatin at 10 mg/day, lovastatin at 20 mg/day, atorvastatin 10 mg/day, and fluvastatin 20 mg/day.

Compared with non-statin lipid-lowering agents, Xuezhikang was more effective in lowering TC levels than inositol nicotinate (WMD -0.56 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.81 to -0.31; 7 trials, n = 624) 65666768697071, fish oils (WMD -0.81 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.11 to -0.50; 2 trials, n = 116) 8081], alginic sodium diester (WMD -1.08 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.38 to -0.78; 1 trial, n = 60) 84, and conjugated estrogens (WMD -0.87 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.20 to -0.54; 1 trial, n = 44) in postmenopausal women85. More participants had 10% reduction of TC levels after treatment of Xuezhikang against inositol nicotinate (16/18 vs. 7/17; RR 2.16; 95% CI 1.20 to 3.90) 72. Xuezhikang was better than fish oils in terms of more participants with 10% reduction of TC levels (WMD 1.36; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.63; 2 trials, n = 146) 8283. No significant difference was found between Xuezhikang and fenofibrate or gemfibrozil, Xuezhikang and elastase or biphenalbid in lowering TC levels. However, Zhibituo was less effective than fenofibrate (WMD 0.31 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.59; 2 trials, n = 248) 32104, but more effective than inositol nicotinate (WMD -0.73 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.13 to -0.33; 8 trials, n = 608) 8889909192939495, and fish oils (WMD -0.76 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.04 to -0.49; 6 trials, n = 491) 979899100101102 by random effect model due to significant heterogeneity (Table 3). More participants treated by Zhibituo had 10% reduction of TC levels compared with those treated by inositol nicotinate (23/30 vs. 13/30; RR 1.77; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.79) 96 or those treated by fish oils (18/25 vs. 7/25; RR 2.57; 95% CI 1.31 to 5.05) 103. Zhibituo appeared superior to alginic sodium diester for the number of participants with 10% reduction of TC levels (105/121 vs. 67/89; RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.32) 105.

Xuezhikang did not differ from Zhibituo in TC-lowering effect (WMD -0.03 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.25 to 0.20; 7 trials, n = 701) 32106107108109110111 (Table 3).

Triglycerides (TG) levels (Tables 2 and 4)

Table 4

Post-treatment triglycerides levels (mmol/L) in randomized controlled trials

Interventions

No. of trials [references]

No. of participants

Weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval)

P value

RYR vs. no intervention/placebo

Zhibituo vs. no intervention

2 [22, 23]

112

-0.54 (-0.77 to -0.32)

< 0.00001

RYR supplement vs. placebo

1 [7]

-0.25 (-0.47 to -0.03)

0.03

Xuezhikang vs. placebo

4 [8, 24–26]

323

-0.40 (-0.70 to -0.10)*

0.008

Zhibituo vs. placebo

3 [27–29]

291

-0.55 (-0.99 to -0.10)

0.02

RYR vs. statins

Xuezhikang vs. simvastatin

14 [6, 30–42]

1251

-0.08 (-0.25 to 0.10)*

0.39

Xuezhikang vs. pravastatin

7 [44–50]

592

0.04 (- 0.29 to 0.38)*

0.79

Xuezhikang vs. lovastatin

3 [51–53]

168

-0.07 (-0.16 to 0.01)

0.09

Xuezhikang vs. atorvastatin

1 [54]

-0.02 (-0.16 to 0.12)

0.78

Xuezhikang vs. fluvastatin

1 [55]

118

0.09 (-0.1 4 to 0.32)

0.44

Zhibituo vs. simvastatin

9 [32, 56–63]

732

0.05 (-0.17 to 0.26)*

0.67

Zhibituo vs. provastatin

1 [22]

-0.02 (-0.19 to 0.15)

0.81

Zhibituo vs. lovastatin

1 [57]

-0.21 (- 0.61 to 0.19)

0.30

RYR vs. non-statin drugs

Xuezhikang vs. inositol nicotinate

7 [65–71]

636

-0.06 (-0.20 to 0.08)

0.38

Xuezhikang vs. fenofibrate

5 [32, 73–76]

337

0.42 (-0.17 to 1.01)*

0.16

Xuezhikang vs. gemfibrozil

3 [77–79]

160

0.41 (0.30 to 0.51)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. fish oils

2 [80, 81]

112

-0.71 (-0.97 to -0.44)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. alginic sodium diester

1 [84]

0.04 (-0.21 to 0.29)

0.75

Xuezhikang vs.conjugated estrogens

1 [85]

-0.82 (-1.31 to -0.33)

0.001

Xuezhikang vs. elastase

1 [86]

107

0.00 (-0.31 to 0.31)

1.00

Xuezhikang vs. biphenalbid

1 [87]

-0.43 (-0.8 1 to -0.05)

0.03

Zhibituo vs. inositol nicotinate

7 [88–93, 95]

598

-0.39 (-0.62 to -0.16)*

0.0008

Zhibituo vs. fish oils

5 [97–100, 102]

394

-0.12 (-0.29 to 0.05)

0.17

Zhibituo vs. fenofibrate

2 [32, 104]

248

0.33 (-0.12 to 0.78)

0.15

RYR vs. RTR

Xuezhikang vs. Zhibituo

7 [32, 106–111]

727

0.05 (-0.17 to 0.27)*

0.66

* Random effects model

There was a 13%–44% reduction of TG levels after treatment by Xuezhikang, 27%–38% by Zhibituo, and 7% by Cholestin. Compared with no treatment, Zhibituo showed a significant effect on reducing TG levels (WMD -0.54 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.77 to -0.32; 2 trials, n = 112) 2223. Compared with placebo, all three RYR preparations significantly reduced TG levels (Cholestin: WMD -0.25 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.47 to -0.03; 1 trial, n = 83 7; Xuezhikang: WMD -0.40 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.10; 4 trials, n = 323 8242526; and Zhibituo: WMD -0.55 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.99 to -0.10; 3 trials, n = 283) 272829 (Table 4). Different treatment duration showed similar effect of RYR preparations in reducing TG levels compared with placebo by 4 weeks (WMD -0.32 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.58 to -0.07; 2 trials, n = 113) 2526, 6 weeks (WMD -0.74; 95% CI -1.10 to -0.37; 2 trials, n = 86) 2728, 8 weeks (WMD -0.35; 95% CI -0.5 to -0.21; 5 trials, n = 406) 78242526, and 12 weeks (WMD -0.25; 95% CI -0.47 to -0.03; 1 trial, n = 83) 7.

There was no statistically significant difference in TG levels after treatment between Xuezhikang or Zhibituo and simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, atorvastatin, or fluvastatin. One trial presented data as number of subjects with at least 20% reduction of TG levels, and it showed no difference between Xuezhikang and lovastatin (47/60 vs. 59/77; RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.23) 64.

Compared with non-statin lipid lowering agents, there was no significant difference between Xuezhikang and inositol nicotinate, fenofibrate, alginic sodium diester, or elastase for TG levels. There was no difference between Xuezhikang and inositol nicotinate in number of participants with over 20% reduction of TG levels (11/16 vs. 10/16; RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.67 to 1.82) 72, and between Xuezhikang and fish oils (58/78 vs. 44/70; RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.8 to 1.64) 8283. However, Xuezhikang was less effective than gemfibrozil (WMD 0.41 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.51; 3 trials, n = 160) 777879, but better than fish oils (WMD -0.71 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.97 to -0.44; 2 trials, n = 112) 8081, conjugated estrogens (WMD -0.82 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.31 to -0.33; 1 trial, n = 44) 85 in postmenopausal women, and biphenalbid (WMD -0.43 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.81 to -0.05; 1 trial, n = 64) 87. Zhibituo showed a significant better TG-lowering effect (WMD -0.39 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.62 to -0.16; 7 trials, n = 598) 88899091929395 compared with inositol nicotinate. However, there was no significant difference between Zhibituo and inositol nicotinate in the number of participants with over 20% reduction of TG levels (9/30 vs. 4/30) in one trial 96. Zhibituo did not differ from fish oils (WMD -0.12 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.29 to 0.05; 5 trials, n = 394) 979899100102 or fenofibrate (WMD 0.33 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.78; 2 trials, n = 248) 32104 (Table 4). In a small trial more participants appeared to have a 20% reduction of TG levels by Zhibituo than by fish oils (20/23 vs. 9/19; RR 1.84; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.03) 103. There was a marginal effect of Zhibituo compared with alginic sodium diester for the number of participants with over 20% reduction of TG levels (69/121 vs. 38/89; RR 1.34; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.78) 105.

There was no significant difference between Xuezhikang and Zhibituo in reducing TG levels (WMD 0.05 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.17 to 0.27; 7 trials, n = 727) (Table 4).

Low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (Tables 2 and 5)

Table 5

Post-treatment low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (mmol/L) in randomized controlled trials

Interventions

No. of trials [references]

No. of participants

Weighted mean difference (95% confidence interval)

P value

RYR vs. no intervention/placebo

Zhibituo vs. no intervention

1 [22]

-0.16 (-0.71 to 0.39)

0.57

RYR supplement vs. placebo

1 [7]

-1.04 (-1.38 to -0.70)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. placebo

4 [8, 24–26]

323

-0.74 (-0.93 to -0.55)

< 0.00001

Zhibituo vs. placebo

1 [29]

205

-0.20 (-0.53 to 0.13)

0.24

RYR vs. statins

Xuezhikang vs. simvastatin

13 [6, 30–34, 36–38, 40–43]

1238

0.14 (-0.05 to 0.33)*

0.14

Xuezhikang vs. pravastatin

7 [44–50]

587

-0.09 (- 0.20 to 0.02)*

0.11

Xuezhikang vs. lovastatin

3 [51–53]

191

0.00 (- 0.26 to 0.27)

0.98

Xuezhikang vs. atorvastatin

1 [54]

0.20 (-0.10 to 0.50)

0.19

Xuezhikang vs. fluvastatin

1 [55]

118

0.14 (-0.10 to 0.38)

0.26

Zhibituo vs. simvastatin

8 [32, 56–62]

601

0.22 (0.04 to 0.39)

0.02

Zhibituo vs. provastatin

1 [22]

-0.11 (-0.60 to 0.38)

0.66

Zhibituo vs. lovastatin

1 [57]

0.03 (-0.30 to 0.36)

0.86

RYR vs. non-statin drugs

Xuezhikang vs. inositol nicotinate

4 [66–68, 70]

299

-0.63 (-0.96 to -0.30)

0.0002

Xuezhikang vs. fenofibrate

3 [32, 74, 76]

220

-0.10 (-1.05 to 0.85)*

0.84

Xuezhikang vs. gemfibrozil

3 [77–79]

152

-0.34 (-0.58 to -0.10)

0.005

Xuezhikang vs. fish oils

1 [81]

-0.89 (-1.41 to -0.37)

0.0008

Xuezhikang vs. conjugated estrogens

1 [85]

-0.10 (-0.43 to 0.23)

0.55

Xuezhikang vs. biphenalbid

1 [87]

-0.06 (-0.32 to 0.20)

0.65

Zhibituo vs. fish oils

5 [97–101]

489

-0.57 (-0.70 to -0.45)

< 0.00001

Zhibituo vs. fenofibrate

1 [32]

0.3 1 (0.04 to 0.58)

0.02

RYR vs. RYR

Xuezhikang vs. Zhibituo

5 [32, 106, 108, 109, 111]

628

-0.08 (-0.18 to 0.02)

0.12

* Random effects model

There was a 22% reduction of LDL-C levels by Cholestin and 27%–32% by Xuezhikang, but 5% by Zhibituo. Zhibituo appeared to have no effect on reducing LDL-C levels compared with no treatment 22 or placebo 28. The relative benefit of reducing LDL-C levels by Cholestin against placebo was WMD -1.04 mmol/L (95% CI -1.38 to -0.70; 1 trial, n = 83) 7, and by Xuezhikang against placebo (WMD) -0.74 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.93 to -0.55; 4 trials, n = 323) 8232425 (Table 5). Different treatment duration showed similar effect of RYR preparations in reducing LDL-C levels compared with placebo by 4 weeks (WMD -0.77 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.0 to -0.54; 2 trials, n = 113) 2526, 8 weeks (WMD -0.87; 95% CI -1.15 to -0.60; 5 trials, n = 406) 78242526, and 12 weeks (WMD -1.04; 95% CI -1.38 to -0.70; 1 trial, n = 83) 7.

Xuezhikang did not differ from simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, atorvastatin or fluvastatin for post-treatment LDL-C levels. Zhibituo appeared to have the same effect as pravastatin or lovastatin, but was less effective than simvastatin (WMD 0.22 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.39; 8 trials, n = 601) 3256575859606162. Compared with non-statin lipid-lowering agents, Xuezhikang was similar to fenofibrate, conjugated estrogens or biphenalbid, but significantly better in reducing LDL-C levels than inositol nicotinate (WMD -0.63 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.96 to -0.30; 4 trials, n = 299) 66676870, gemfibrozil (WMD -0.34 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.58 to -0.10; 3 trials, n = 152) 777879, and fish oils (WMD -0.89 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.41 to -0.37, 1 trial, n = 95) 81. Zhibituo was better than fish oils in reducing LDL-C levels (WMD -0.57 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.70 to -0.45; 5 trials, n = 489) 979899100101, but less effective than fenofibrate (WMD 0.31 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.58; 1 trial, n = 90) 32 (Table 5).

No significant difference was found between Xuezhikang and Zhibituo in LDL-C levels (-0.08 mmol/L;-0.18 to 0.02; 5 trials, n = 628) 32106108109111 (Table 5).

High density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels (Tables 2 and 6)

Table 6

Post-treatment high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (mmol/L) in randomized controlled trials

Interventions

No. of trials [references]

No. of participants

Weighted mean difference its (95% confidence interval)

P value

RYR vs. no intervention/placebo

Zhibituo vs. no intervention

1 [22]

0.21 (0.04 to 0.38)

0.02

RYR supplement vs. placebo

1 [7]

0.10 (-0.04 to 0.24)

0.16

Xuezhikang vs. placebo

4 [8, 24–26]

323

0.11 (0.05 to 0.17)

0.0008

Zhibituo vs. placebo

3 [27–29]

291

0.21 (0.15 to 0.27)

< 0.00001

RYR vs. statins

Xuezhikang vs. simvastatin

14 [6, 30–34, 36–43]

1277

0.06 (-0.11 to 0.22)*

0.49

Xuezhikang vs. pravastatin

7 [44–50]

587

-0.01 (-0.06 to 0.03)

0.51

Xuezhikang vs. lovastatin

3 [51–53]

152

0.06 (0.00 to 0.11)

0.05

Xuezhikang vs. atorvastatin

1 [54]

0.01 (-0.17 to 0.19)

0.91

Xuezhikang vs. fluvastatin

1 [55]

118

-0.02 (-0.1 0 to 0.06)

0.62

Zhibituo vs. simvastatin

9 [32, 56–63]

666

-0.07 (-0.12 to -0.03)

0.0009

Zhibituo vs. provastatin

1 [22]

-0.02 (-0.22 to 0.18)

0.85

Zhibituo vs. lovastatin

1 [57]

-0.07 (-0.23 to 0.09)

0.39

RYR vs. non-statin drugs

Xuezhikang vs. inositol nicotinate

7 [65–71]

608

0.17 (0.06 to 0.28)*

0.002

Xuezhikang vs. fenofibrate

4 [32, 73, 74, 76]

257

0.03 (-0.06 to 0.13)

0.49

Xuezhikang vs. gemfibrozil

2 [77, 79]

108

-0.03 (-0.3 5 to 0.28)

0.83

Xuezhikang vs. fish oils

2 [80, 81]

0.17 (0.09 to 0.25)

< 0.0001

Xuezhikang vs. alginic sodium diester

1 [84]

0.86 (0.75 to 0.97)

< 0.00001

Xuezhikang vs. conjugated estrogens

1 [85]

0.00 (-0.09 to 0.09)

1.00

Xuezhikang vs. elastase

1 [86]

107

0.20 (0.10 to 0.30)

< 0.0001

Xuezhikang vs. biphenalbid

1 [87]

0.25 (0.11 to 0.39)

0.0003

Zhibituo vs. inositol nicotinate

6 [89–91, 93–95]

422

0.18 (0.09 to 0.27)*

< 0.0001

Zhibituo vs. fish oils

6 [97–102]

400

0.14 (0.06 to 0.23)*

0.001

Zhibituo vs. fenofibrate

2 [32, 104]

248

-0.13 (-0.37 to 0.11)

0.28

RYR vs. RYR

Xuezhikang vs. Zhibituo

7 [32, 106–111]

627

0.04 (-0.02 to 0.11)*

0.20

* Random effects model

There was an increase of HDL-C levels between 15% and 22% by Zhibituo. However, the findings for Xuezhikang were not consistent ranging from a 2% to 17% increase and 15% decrease in four trials. Cholestin did not change the HDL-C levels after the treatment 7. A beneficial effect of increasing HDL-C levels was shown when Xuezhikang was compared with placebo (WMD 0.11 mmol/L; 95%CI 0.05 to 0.17; 4 trials, n = 323) 8242526, and when Zhibituo was compared with no treatment (WMD 0.21 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.38; 1 trial, n = 62) 22 and with placebo (WMD 0.21 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.27; 3 trials, n = 291) 272829 (Table 6). Different treatment durations showed that of RYR preparations increased HDL-C levels compared with placebo by 6 weeks (WMD 0.27; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.38; 2 trials, n = 86) 2728 and 8 weeks (WMD 0.11; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.16; 5 trials, n = 406) 78242526. There was no significant difference between RYR and placebo at 4 weeks and at 12 weeks for HDL-C levels 72526.

Compared with statins, Xuezhikang appeared better than lovastatin in raising HDL-C levels (WMD 0.06 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.11; 3 trials, n = 152) 5153. Zhibituo was inferior to simvastatin (WMD -0.07 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.12 to -0.03; 9 trials, n = 666) 325657585960616263. There was no significant difference among other comparisons of RYR preparations and statins. Compared with non-statins, Xuezhikang was superior to inositol nicotinate (WMD 0.17 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.28; 7 trials, n = 608) by random effects model 65666768697071, fish oils (WMD 0.17 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.25; 2 trials, n = 70) 8081, alginic sodium diester (WMD 0.86 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.75 to 0.97; 1 trial, n = 60) 84, elastase (WMD 0.20 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.30; 1 trial, n = 107) 86, and to biphenalbid (WMD 0.25 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.39; 1 trial, n = 64) 87. There was no significant difference between Xuezhikang and fenofibrate, gemfibrozil, or estrogens in affecting HDL-C levels. Zhibituo was superior to inositol nicotinate (WMD 0.18 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.27; 6 trials, n = 422) 899091939495 and to fish oils (WMD 0.14 mmol/L; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.23; 6 trials, n = 400) 979899100101102 both in random effects model. There was no significant difference between Zhibituo and fenofibrate (WMD -0.13 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.37 to 0.11; 2 trials, n = 248) 32104.

No significant difference was found between Xuezhikang and Zhibituo in affecting HDL-C levels (WMD 0.04 mmol/L; 95% CI -0.02 to 0.11; 7 trials, n = 627) 32106107108109110111 (Table 6).

Adverse effects

Seventy-seven trials reported outcomes of adverse effects, and the incidence rate ranged from 1.3% to 36%. The most commonly reported adverse effects were dizziness, low appetite, nausea, stomach-ache, abdominal distension, and diarrhoea. A small proportion of participants suffered from increased serum BUN and ALT levels. The trials did not report serious adverse events.

Cost-effectiveness

One trial evaluated cost-effectiveness of Xuezhikang vs. pravastatin for treatment of hypercholesterolemia 49. For a reduction of 1 mmol/L TC level, the cost of Xuezhikang and pravastatin was 57 USD and 78 USD respectively. For a reduction of 1 mmol/L TG level, the cost of Xuezhikang and pravastatin was 242 USD and 820 USD respectively; and for a reduction of 1 mmol/L LDL-C level, the cost was 59 USD and 84 USD respectively.

Discussion

Based on this review and meta-analysis, three different kinds of RYR preparations tested by in randomized trials demonstrate beneficial effects on reducing TC, TG, and LDL-C levels, and on increasing HDL-C levels in individuals with hyperlipidemia. The treatment duration of RYR ranged from 4 to 24 weeks (median of 8 weeks), and the lipid modification effects have been shown at four weeks of the treatment, and the effects remained at 24 weeks of the treatment. Long-term follow-up effects after the treatment have not been reported by the trials. The use of RYR preparations seems safe and well tolerated.

Before accepting the findings of this review to form a basis for clinical practice, we need to consider the following weaknesses in this review. First, the randomized trials in this review had several methodological flaws in terms of insufficient reporting of generation methods of the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, and double blinding. The trials provided limited descriptions of study design, and most trials stated only that patients were randomly assigned; thus the information does not allow a judgement of whether or not it was conducted properly. We therefore state that the differences between RYR preparation and control drugs may be associated with the methodologically less rigorous trials 16171819. The sample size for trials comparing RYR with statins or other established treatments was not justified and we do not know if the trials were designed as 'equivalence trials'. The limited number of trials with adequate quality prohibits us from performing meaningful sensitivity analyses to illuminate robustness of the results in the review.

Second, Vickers and colleagues 112 found that some countries, including China, publish unusually high proportions of positive results, for which publication bias is a possible explanation. All identified studies for this systematic review originated from China except one trial conducted in the USA and published in an international peer-reviewed journal 7. Inability to identify unpublished eligible trials from the searching, trials with small samples and positive findings may raise the issue of publication bias.

There are some variations in RYR preparations and treatment regimens including composition, dosage and duration. Cholestin is an extract from RYR containing a special strain of yeast which produces monacolin K (lovastatin) 7. Xuezhikang and Zhibituo are two Chinese proprietary medicines that contain other herbs in addition to RYR as main components. In some trials, placebo effects are substantial compared with baseline as demonstrated in trials of Xuezhikang where placebo treatment achieved 1% to 15% reduction of TC levels, and 6% to 16% reduction of TG levels (Table 2). Therefore, in non-placebo-controlled and non-double blind trials, placebo effects may add to the complexity of interpreting the present findings of the overall beneficial effects, and the interpretation should be taken with caution.

Given the generally low methodological quality of the randomized trials and potential publication bias, we suggest further rigorously designed trials are still needed before RYR preparation could be recommended for clinical use or as an alternative treatment to statins. The currently ongoing placebo-controlled trials in Europe may provide useful information 21. In addition to anti-hyperlipidemic effects of RYR preparations, cost-effectiveness and safety should be further investigated in future trials 113.

Conclusion

Current evidence from randomized trials shows short-term beneficial effects of RYR preparations on lipid modification. More rigorous trials are needed, and long-term effects and safety should be investigated if RYR preparations are to be recommended as one of the alternative treatments for primary hyperlipidemia.

Competing interests

The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

JL conceived, designed, drafted the review, and performed study selection, data extraction, analyses, and interpretation. JZ did the literature search, study selection, and cross-checked the data extraction; YS developed the search strategy, performed electronic searches and retrieved articles; SG, TA, and VF provided methodological perspectives, and revised the review. All authors contributed to the writing of the review.

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr Antonio Bianchi for providing information on ongoing study on RYR preparation 'Lipolysar', and Beijing Weixin for unpublished study on Xuezhikang, and Pharmalogica in Norway for 'Hypocol'.

<it>Monascus purpureus </it>(monograph) Altern Med Rev 2004 9 2 208 210 15253679 Constituents of red yeast rice, a traditional Chinese food and medicine Ma J Li Y Ye Q Li J Hua Y Ju D Zhang D Cooper R Chang M J Agric Food Chem 2000 48 11 5220 5 10.1021/jf000338c 11087463 Cardiovascular disease: C-reactive protein and the inflammatory disease paradigm: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, alpha-tocopherol, red yeast rice, and olive oil polyphenols. A review of the literature Patrick L Uzick M Altern Med Rev 2001 6 3 248 71 11410071 An analysis of nine proprietary Chinese red yeast rice dietary supplements: implications of variability in chemical profile and contents Heber D Lembertas A Lu QY Bowerman S Go VL J Altern Complement Med 2001 7 2 133 9 10.1089/107555301750164181 11327519 Multicenter clinical trial of the serum lipid-lowering effects of a <it>Monascus purpureus </it>(red yeast) rice preparation from traditional Chinese medicine Wang J Lu Z Chi J Wang W Su M Kou W Yu P Yu L Chen L Zhu JS Chang J Cur Ther Res 1997 58 964 978 10.1016/S0011-393X(97)80063-X Effect of <it>Xuezhikang </it>on the treatment of primary hyperlipidemia Kou WR Lu ZL Guo JX Li HY Xue SW Lin YZ Wu XS Chen H Zhonghua Neike Zazhi 1997 36 8 529 31 10436958 Cholesterol-lowering effects of a proprietary Chinese red-yeast-rice dietary supplement Heber D Yip I Ashley JM Elashoff DA Elashoff RM Go VL Am J Chin Nutr 1999 69 2 231 6 Prospective study of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of primary hyperlipidemia Shen ZW Yu PL Sun MZ Chi JM Zhou YF Zhu XS Yang CY He CF Natl Med J China 1996 76 2 156 7 The clinical observation of hyperlipoproteinemia treated with <it>Zhibituo</it> Liu SS Kou MK Ding H Li CM He L He L Zhang CM Li YF Li ZF Yang MJ Chengdu Zhongyiyao Daxue Xuebao 1996 19 3 12 5 Medical management of hyperlipidemia/dyslipidemia Kreisberg RA Oberman A J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2003 88 6 2445 61 10.1210/jc.2003-030388 12788840 A safety look at currently available statins Moghadasian MH Expert Opin Drug Saf 2002 1 3 269 74 10.1517/14740338.1.3.269 12904142 Statins for everybody? New evidence on the efficacy and safety of the inhibitors of HMG Co-A reductase Alcocer L Am J Ther 2003 10 6 423 8 10.1097/00045391-200311000-00008 14624280 Safety of statins: focus on clinical pharmacokinetics and drug interactions Bellosta S Paoletti R Corsini A Circulation 2004 109 11150 7 10.1161/01.CIR.0000131519.15067.1f Herbs for serum cholesterol reduction: a systematic review Thompson Coon JS Ernst E J Fam Pract 2003 52 6 468 78 12791229 Executive Summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults JAMA 2001 285 19 2486 97 10.1001/jama.285.19.2486 11368702 Empirical evidence of bias Schulz KF Chalmers I Hayes R Altman D JAMA 1995 273 5 408 12 10.1001/jama.273.5.408 7823387 Does quality of reports of randomized trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses Moher D Pham B Jones A Cook DJ Jadad AR Moher M Tugwell P Klassen TP Lancet 1998 352 9128 609 13 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)01085-X 9746022 Reported methodological quality and discrepancies between large and small randomized trials in meta-analyses Kjaergard LL Villumsen J Gluud C Ann Intern Med 2001 135 11 982 9 11730399 Assessment of study quality. Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook 4.2.0 [updated March 2003] Clarke M Oxman AD The Cochrane Library Oxford: Update Software 2003 2 Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses Higgins JPT Thompson SG Deeks JJ Altman DG BMJ 2003 327 7414 557 60 192859 12958120 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 Personal communication with the trial sponsors in Norway and Italy Randomized controlled study of <it>Diao Zhibituo </it>for lipid modulation effect Tang HL Sichuan Yixue 2004 25 1 78 9 Observation on therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Zhao YL Ouyang HB Changchun Yixue Zazhi 1998 11 1 21 Effect of <it>Xuezhikang </it>on endothelial function in patients with hyperlipidemia Cheng XM Yu ZM Luo HD Qiu YH Chen MX Chin J Arterioscler 2001 9 3 235 7 Randomized, double blind, controlled trial for the clinical therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>in the elderly with hyperlipidemia Qin SC Zhang WQ Qi P Zhao ML Dong ZN Li YC Xu XM Fang X Fu L Zhonghua Neike Zazhi 1998 37 6 401 2 Clinical observation of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Xiao M Ye P Shuli Yixue Zazhi 2001 14 3 244 5 Observation on therapuetic effect of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Huang GZ Yang S Wu ZG Dier Junyi Daxue Xuebao 1998 19 1 94 5 Observation on the effect of <it>Zhibituo </it>in treating hyperlipidemia Peng DY Zhongguo Yejin Gongye Yixue Zazhi 1998 15 4 201 3 <it>Zhibituo </it>vs. placebo treatment of hyperlipidemia a double blind randomized and multicenter study Xu JM Chen SX Hu WY Cai NS Xu Q Wu ZG Sun KX Zhongguo Xinyao Yu Linchuang Zazhi 1997 16 1 47 51 Clinical observation of <it>Xuezhikang </it>in treating middle and old age hyperlipidemia Chen FJ Ruan Q Qi HW Yuan PY Shanghai Yufangyixue Zazhi 2003 15 5 222 3 Effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>on hypercholesterolemia Chen LL Liu J Yiyao Daobao 2002 21 1 31 2 Clinical observation on effect of <it>Taizhi'an </it>capsule in treating 150 patients with hyperlipidemia Li QL Zhang YF Zhongguo Zhongxiyi Jiehe Zazhi 2003 23 5 335 7 12800412 Comparison of the effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>with simvastatin on lipid profile modification in patients with hypercholesterolemia Lu GP Huo SQ Shen YC Gong LS Zhonghua Neike Zazhi 1998 37 6 371 3 Controlled observation on therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and simvastatin for treatment of hypercholesterolemia Quan SL Wang W Qu XW Chen J Zhonghua Shiyong Yixue 2003 3 5 427 Comparison of the effects of the herbal lipid regulator decoction, <it>Xuezhikang </it>and simvastatin on lipid modulation in the middle-aged and elderly subjects with hyperlipidemia Shen G Wang J Wang JF Zhongguo Jiceng Yiyao 2000 7 4 280 1 Therapeutic observations of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of 60 cases of elderly with hyperlipidemia Wang SH Sun JL Liu HQ Anhui Linchuang Zhongyi Zazhi 2003 15 6 474 5 Comparison of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and simvastatin in regulating lipids for hypercholesterolemia Wang XL Hu XM Zhongxiyi Jiehe Xinnaoxueguanbing Zazhi 2004 2 6 319 20 Effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>vs. simvastatin in treating hyperlipidemia Xi BL Ren JY Guowai Yixue: Xin Xueguanbing Fence 2002 29 4 233 4 Observation of the therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of 77 elderly with hyperlipidemia Zeng TK Shoudu Yiyao 1999 6 11 49 Comparison of lipid-lowering effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and Simvastatin for hyperlipidemia Zhang G Zhang KX Xu Z Guang XF Shoudu Yiyao 1998 5 6 35 6 Therapeutic observations of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Zhao XH Jiang XM Ao LJ Yunnan Yiyao 1998 19 1 26 Clinical controlled study on the therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and Simvastatin Zheng Y Luo XZ Wang SL Yang YJ Zhongguo Yaoshi 2001 36 10 715 Effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and simvastatin on apolipoprotein B and A1 in patients with hyperlipidemia Zhu QF Jiang L Wang Y Guangming Zhongyi 2003 18 5 24 5 Clinical efficacy of capsule <it>Xuezhikang </it>in treatment of hypercholesterolemia Chen L Qin YW Guo RB Yaoxue Fuwu Yu Yanjiu 2002 2 1 39 40 Therapeutic observations of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of primary hyperlipidemia Jin W Yang H Zhang C Zhang CJ Xu YH Zhongguo Zhongxiyi Jiehe Zazhi 1997 17 7 434 5 Effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>on endothelial function in aged patients with hyperlipidemia Lei HZ Guangxi Yixue 2004 26 4 495 7 Clinical observations of 41 cases of elderly with hyperlipidemia treated with <it>Xuezhikang</it> Li YS Lei HZ Zhu MJ Zhongguo Quanke Yixue 2003 6 2 163 Application of cost-effectiveness analysis in <it>Xuezhikang </it>and pravastatin for the treatment hypercholesterolemia Wang DG Li D Nie ZY Zhongguo Yaoshi 2003 12 9 53 5 Comparative study of relatively long-term therapy for dyslipidemia with low-dose <it>Xuezhikang </it>or pravastatin in Chinese patients Xu CB Hu DY Kang LP Tian YW Gao MM Xu ZM Jin SY Ma FY Ma M Shi XY Zhang BH Long NZ Li L Xue L Zhang JH Chen XL Dai CX Zhongguo Yaoxue 2000 9 4 218 22 Observations of therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of primary hyperlipidemia Yu CY Zhang C Yang H Jin W Heilongjiang Yixue Zazhi 2004 17 2 151 2 Clinical observations of <it>Ruanmaijianzhi </it>capsule in the treatment of dyslipidemia Li BH Zheng GJ Zhang WG Xu M Ren P Hebei Zhongyi Zazhi 2004 26 9 657 9 Analysis of therapeutic effect of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of primary hypercholesterolemia Xu SG Henon Yixue Xinxi 2002 10 13 6 7 Comparison of lovastatin and Chinese <it>Xuezhikang </it>in lipid modification for primary hyperlipidemia Zheng FS Long XD Liu HM Liu YL Bao YZ Yu M Yunan Yixue 2000 21 5 442 3 Comparison of the effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and atorvastatin for treatment of hyperlipidemia Shen MY Zhonghua Shiyong Yiyao Zazhi 2003 2 5 439 40 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and Lescol for treatment of hyperlipidemia Wang AH Zhang GD Zhongguo Zonghe Yixue 2002 3 7 617 8 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of simvastatin and <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Chen ZM Guangxi Yike Daxue Xuebao 2001 18 4 543 Clinical observations of statin alone or combined with unsaturated fatty acids for the treatment of combined hyperlipidemia in elderly people Guo WC Feng WJ Beijing Yixue 2003 25 1 25 7 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>and simvastatin for regulating dyslipidemia Guo XM Tu L Mi S Zhongyao Yaoli Yu Linchuang 1999 15 6 46 8 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of simvastatin and <it>Zhibituo </it>for the elderly with hyperlipidemia Huang YL Zhou JG Zhang HF Shi YX Wang MS Yixue Yu Gongcheng 2001 3 1 24 7 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>and simvastatin for treatment of hyperlipidemia Yang WJ Fu XJ Zhongguo Xiandai Yiyao Yu Jishu 2003 3 2 2 4 Comparison of <it>Zhibituo </it>and simvastatin for their effects on hyperlipidemia Zhang GR Guangxi Yixue 2002 24 5 713 4 Comparative interventional therapies of dyslipidemia by simvastatin and <it>Zhibituo </it>with 60 cases Zhang QL Guoji Yiyao Weisheng Daobao 2004 10 10 29 30 <it>Zhibituo </it>vs. simvastatin in treatment of hyperlipidemia Zheng CJ Wang P Zhongguo Yaoshi 2001 4 6 447 8 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and lovastatin Wang SX Xiandai Zhongxiyi Jiehe Zazhi 2004 13 20 2707 Comparison of the effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>with inositol hexanicotinate on lipid profile modification Li DX Li YF Lu HY Henan Zhigong Yixueyuan Xuebao 2000 12 1 17 8 Therapeutic observations on <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Li YM Sun RX Zhongguo Shiyong Xiangcun Yisheng Zazhi 2004 11 8 25 6 Clinical observations of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of mixed type of hyperlipidemia Liu L Li JP Shen PN Zhonghua Shiyong Yixue 2000 16 12 1047 8 Effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>vs. Inositol niacinate in treating hyperlipidemia Qi P Huang Y Deng J Jiangxi Yixueyuan Xuebao 2002 42 4 24 5 <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of 76 patients with hyperlipidemia Yang SS Zhongchengyao 2002 24 10 815 6 Comparison of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and inositol nicotinate for treatment of hyperlipidemia Zhang JS Zhiye Yu Jiankang 2002 18 1 138 40 Effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>on treatment of primary hyperlipidemia Zheng JR Wang B Yixue Luntan Zazhi 2004 25 14 21 2 <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of 20 cases of hyperlipidemia Zhou ZL Liu CH Hunan Zhongyiyao Daobao 1999 5 7 25 Comparison of the therapeutic effects and compliance of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and Fenofibrate in patients with hyperlipidemia Jiang HP Xiandai Zhenduan Yu Zhiliao 2001 12 Suppl 29 Micronised fenofibrate for treatment of mixed type of hyperlipidemia Li GR Li JP Mai WY Zeng Y Guangdong Yixue 1999 20 11 895 6 Clinical observation of Finofibrate and <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Ma F Ma XH Zhongguo Hangtianye Yiyao 2003 5 1 55 6 Effects and safety of combined treatment by <it>Xuezhikang </it>and micronized fenofibrate in patients with hyperlipidemia Zhu WM Wu SR Zhongguo Linchuang Yixue Zazhi 2003 4 2 18 20 Effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>on serum lipid profile, thromboxane A2 and prostacyclin in patients with hyperlipidemia Jiang JB Hao XY Deng CQ Zhou HT Lin J Zhonghua Neike Zazhi 1999 38 8 517 9 11798687 Clinical study on the therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Wang CW Gao FM You L Mudanjiang Yixueyuan Xuebao 2000 21 3 13 <it>Xuezhikang</it>, gemfibrozil for regulation of hyperlipidemia in elderly and insulin sensitivity Wang YF Yang CK Xu WJ Sun L Liu B Wang GG Zhongguo Xinyao Zazhi 1998 7 3 209 11 <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of 40 cases of hyperlipidemia Liu ZB Linchuang Huicui 1998 13 8 367 8 Comparison of lipid modification of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and <it>Duoxikang </it>in hyperlipidemia Xia CH Suzhou Yixueyuan Xuebao 1999 19 9 1015 6 Therapeutic observations on <it>Xuezhikang </it>capsules for treatment of hyperlipidemia Xu WY Yan YZ Tang ZH Haixia Yaoxue 2003 15 2 65 6 Observations of <it>Xuezhikang </it>on clinical effects and haemorheology Zheng H Dan XY Ning H Xue B Hebei Yiyao 2001 7 1 46 8 Observations of <it>Xuezhikang </it>in treatment of hyperlipidemia and abnormal haemorheology Zhang WM Yang JX Li F Zhang GW Henan Shiyong Shenjingbing Zazhi 2000 3 3 47 8 Effects of conjugated estrogen and <it>Xuezhikang </it>in low dosage on blood lipid in postmenopausal women Feng JC Wang JS Wang CP Jiang YJ Tan GZ Xiandai Zhongxiyi jiehe Zazhi 2000 9 23 2334 5 Clinical observations of the lipid-lowering effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and elastase Kong YM Gao H Liu XL Zhongguo Yaoshi 1999 8 3 56 Observations of the short-term effects of Probucol in treatment of hyperlipidemia Yan HD Guo JH Jia ST Shanxi Linchuang Yixue 1999 8 2 103 4 Observations on the therapeutic effects of <it>Diao Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Bi JZ Ma SZ Li YQ Shiyong Zhongxiyi jiehe Zazhi 1996 9 12 729 Clinical observations on <it>Diao Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Cai MX Deng JX Lu LF Fujian Yiyao Zazhi 1997 19 2 83 4 Observations on the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Cong B Hebei Yiyao 1999 5 3 60 1 Comparison of <it>Diao Zhibituo </it>and Inositol nicotinate for the lipid lowering effects Huang LJ Chen MS Zhongyuan Yikan 1997 24 1 8 10 Comparison of <it>Zhibituo </it>and Inositol nicotinate for treatment of hyperlipidemia Li FL Zeng WH Nongken Yixue 2002 24 3 198 9 Observations of the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of 50 patients with hyperlipidemia Ma L Gao Y Li BZ Xibei Yaoxue Zazhi 2000 15 3 126 Observations of <it>Zhibituo </it>on the therapeutic effects in treatment of 60 patients with hyperlipidemia Qiu JP Wang ZJ Xu XP Ma SY Kuang RJ Shandong Yiyao 2002 42 6 45 6 <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of 100 cases of hyperlipidemia Yang MJ Wang RZ Zhongguo Xinyao Yu Linchuang Zazhi 1997 16 1 9 10 Observations on the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Yu HY Li TH Xinxueguan Kangfu Yixue Zazhi 1999 8 1 30 1 Observations on the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia in the elderly Chen GY Guizhou Yiyao 1999 23 4 307 8 Comparison of <it>Zhibituo </it>and <it>Duoxikang </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Chen JF Yan ZZ Li PT Zhongguo Xinyao Yu Linchuang Zazhi 1997 16 1 15 17 Comparison of <it>Zhibituo </it>and fish oil capsules for treatment of hyperlipidemia Fu G Liu WJ Wang GT Heilongjiang Yiyao 2000 23 5 93 4 Comparison of <it>Zhibituo </it>and <it>Duoxikang </it>in treating 108 patients with hyperlipidemia Jin WQ Li CW Xu M Gao YX Xu XW Zhongguo Xinyao Yu Linchuang Zazhi 1997 16 1 61 2 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>and fish oils for treatment of 30 cases of hyperlipidemia Li Y Min YB Fan XJ Guangdong Yaoxue Zazhi 2000 10 1 43 5 Clinical evaluation of <it>Zhibituo </it>and concentrated fish oils for treatment of hyperlipidemia Wang LB Qiao JJ Li YM Jiamusi Yixueyuan Xuebao 1998 21 1 62 3 Observations on the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of hyperlipidemia Yang Q Xue HQ Zhongguo Jiceng Yiyao 1999 6 3 129 Observations on the therapeutic effects of <it>Zhibituo </it>for treatment of 158 patients with hyperlipidemia Gu ZY Lu ZF Zhu HQ Nantong Yixueyuan Xuebao 1998 18 3 374 5 Controlled study of <it>Diao Zhibituo </it>and alginic sodium diester for lipid lowering effect Chen ZL Henan Shiyong Shenjingbing Zazhi 1998 1 2 20 Effects of lipid modification of <it>Diao Zhibituo </it>capsules Chen L Qin YW Zheng X Zhongguo Zhongxiyi Jiehe Zazhi 2003 23 5 389 <it>Xuezhikang </it>for treatment of 30 cases of hyperlipidemia Guo XL Li Y Yin GN Ningxia Yixue Zazhi 1999 21 7 418 <it>Zhibituo </it>capsules in treatment of hyperlipidemia: a multi-centre clinical trial Lu WX Wang JX Zhu JG Xu DS Yang MJ Wang HW Wang RZ Zheng R Zhongguo Xinyao Yu Linchuang Zazhi 1999 18 6 365 7 Comparison of the therapeutic effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and <it>Zhibituo </it>in treatment of adults with hyperlipidemia Lu YS Gu JS Zhou WG Zhongguo Zhongxiyi Jiehe Zazhi 1998 18 8 467 Comparison of lipid-lowering effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and <it>Zhibituo</it> Sun FF Ding XF Wang M Jiceng Yixue Luntan 2004 8 2 121 2 Comparison of the lipid modification effects of <it>Xuezhikang </it>and <it>Zhibituo </it>for hypercholesterolemia Xiao CL Yao ZQ He SM Guangdong Yixue Zazhi 2000 21 5 430 1 Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials Vickers A Goyal N Harland R Rees R Contral Clin Trials 1998 19 2 159 66 10.1016/S0197-2456(97)00150-5 Incidence of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis in patients treated with lipid-lowering drugs Graham DJ Staffa JA Shatin D Andrade SE Schech SD La Grenade L Gurwitz JH Chan KA Goodman MJ Platt R JAMA 2004 292 21 2585 90 10.1001/jama.292.21.2585 15572716