Skip to main content

Table 4 Multivariate linear regression models of the effect of different treatment regimes on the change in fasting levels of hs-GH over 12 months in BCAPS

From: Fasting levels of growth hormone are associated with carotid intima media thickness but are not affected by fluvastatin treatment

Sex

Modela

Treatment group

N (med/placebo)

Bb

95%CI

P

All

Original

Metoprolol-Placebo

118/117

−0.09

−0.35 to 0.17

0.48

  

Fluvastatin-Metoprolol

117/117

0.10

−0.13 to 0.33

0.38

  

Fluvastatin-Placebo

120/117

−0.04

−0.24 to 0.17

0.72

 

Pooled

Fluvastatin

237/235

0.08

−0.09 to 0.24

0.24

 

Pooled

Metoprolol

235/237

0.02

−0.14 to 0.19

0.80

Male

Original

Metoprolol-Placebo

40/39

−0.17

−0.55 to 0.21

0.38

  

Fluvastatin-Metoprolol

47/39

−0.53

−1.02 to −0.04

0.03

  

Fluvastatin-Placebo

48/39

−0.15

−0.42 to 0.11

0.26

 

Pooled

Fluvastatin

95/79

−0.27

−0.54 to 0.00

0.05

 

Pooled

Metoprolol

87/87

−0.25

−0.52 to 0.02

0.07

Female

Original

Metoprolol-Placebo

78/78

−0.07

−0.38 to 0.25

0.68

  

Fluvastatin-Metoprolol

70/78

0.32

0.06 to 0.58

0.02

  

Fluvastatin-Placebo

72/78

0.03

−0.23 to 0.28

0.83

 

Pooled

Fluvastatin

142/156

0.20

0.00 to 0.41

0.05

 

Pooled

Metoprolol

148/150

0.10

−0.10 to 0.31

0.33

  1. Models adjusted for: age and standardized values of natural logarithm of GH at baseline. In addition adjusted for sex in the analysis for all
  2. aThree different models are performed: in “original” the different treatment groups are each one compared with placebo. In “pooled” the individuals receiving fluvastatin are pooled and compared with individuals not receiving fluvastatin and vice versa with metoprolol.
  3. bB coefficients are expressed as the SD increment of the natural logarithm of ΔGH (12 months – baseline) with treatment of the medicine in question as compared with placebo.