Digestery
Everyday supplements › Fish Oil and the Heart › Studies

Randomized trial · measured the question itself

Trial in 2,460 adults in Japan: EPA did not clearly change main heart events

Miyauchi and colleagues · Circulation · 2024

Original title: Randomized Trial for Evaluation in Secondary Prevention Efficacy of Combination Therapy-Statin and Eicosapentaenoic Acid (RESPECT-EPA).

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

No difference

Main heart events: 112 of 1225 (9.1%) vs 155 of 1235 (12.6%) (hazard ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.62-1.00]; P=0.055). New atrial fibrillation: 3.1% vs 1.6% (P=0.017).

The study at a glance

Type of study
Randomized trial
Who or what was studied
2,460 people · adults in Japan with stable heart artery disease, low blood EPA, and on statins
What was tested
Icosapent ethyl 1800 a day (the abstract gives no unit) versus no EPA, open-label, median 5 years
What it measured
The question itself: heart attacks, strokes and heart deaths
Daily amount
1800 mg a day
How long
260 weeks
Trial registration
UMIN000012069
Who has a stake
Company stake
Authors report lecture fees or grants from many drug firms, including Mochida, Kowa, Daiichi-Sankyo and Bayer.
Journal
Circulation, 2024
Source
PubMed record 38873793. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • ✓Randomized: people were put into groups by chance, so the groups start out alike.
  • ✓Large: 2,460 people.
  • ✓Long: about 5 years.
  • ✓Measured the question itself: heart attacks, strokes and heart deaths.
  • –Company stake: Authors report lecture fees or grants from many drug firms, including Mochida, Kowa, Daiichi-Sankyo and Bayer.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

Each dot is one on-topic paper on this question. Steps near the top answer the question more directly.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: heart attacks, strokes and heart deaths

    11

    7 benefit, 4 no difference

    ↑ This study is the ringed dot

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    3

    1 benefit, 2 no difference

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  4. Population studies

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  5. Blood levels and genes

    0

    None among the papers we read.

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Does fish oil prevent heart disease?”

Little or no effect in most trials.

Confidence: moderate. Based on 21 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer

Of the other 10 papers on the same step: 7 benefit, 3 no difference. This one found no difference. It differs from most of them.

Other papers on the same step

See all 21 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The reviewer corrected 3 fields after reading the abstract. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.